
'■■r-'r^^M-Tikfi-r^.Kf^X 




THE 



ATONEMENT, 



RELATIONS TO LAW AND MORAL GOVERNMENT. 

BY 

ALBERT BARNES. 



" There may be beings in the universe whose capacities, and knowledge, and views 
may be so extensive as that the whole Christian dispensation may to them appear 
natural, i. e. analogous and conformable to God's dealings with other parts of his crea- 
tion ; as natural as the visible course of things appears to us." 

Butler's Anaiogt, Part I. ch. i. 




PHILADELPHIA: 
PARRY & M«M I L L AN, 

SUCCESSORS TO A. HART, iate CARET & HART. 

1859. 



32- 



Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1859, by 

ALBERT BARNES, 

in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States for the Eastern 
District of Pennsylvania. 



STEREOTYPED BY L. JOHNSON & CO. 
PHILADELPHIA. 



COLLINS, PRINTER. 



TO THE 



HON. HIRAM DENIO, LL.D. 

A JUDGE OF THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF 
NEW YORK. 



It is partly from the memory of our early friendship, and 
partly because I can better express the design of this work in 
this way than by the usual form of a preface, that I have 
asked the privilege of dedicating it to you. 

We began life together. We were both in a comparatively 
humble but respectable position, and we have been both 
directed by an overruling hand in paths which we did not at 
first contemplate. Both, when we left our homes to seek an 
education, designed to pursue the study of the law; but in 
our professional pursuits, and in the general course of our 
lives, we have been led in different ways. You, by talent, 
by industry, by integrity, have risen to that position de- 
servedly high which you now occupy as one of the Judges of 
the highest court of our native State. My thoughts were early 
turned to a different profession, and my steps have been 
directed in another course. Both of us have been pros- 
pered; and now, when we have reached that period of life 
in which we cannot but be looking forward to its close, I have 
a pleasure in referring in this manner to the time when we 
began life together, and in connecting your name with this 

book. 

3 



4 DEDICATION. 

It is true that in this work, designed to illustrate the 
relation of the atonement to law, I have travelled somewhat 
out of my profession, as I have from the usual course of my 
studies. I know the danger of doing this ; and I think it not 
improbable that you will detect things in this feature of my 
work which a professional lawyer would have avoided. But 
I have never ceased to feel an interest in the profession which 
was the object of my early thought and purpose, nor have I 
ever ceased to feel that personally it would be to me the most 
attractive of all the callings of life, save that one in which T 
have spent my days. I have wished to commend the great 
doctrine of the Christian atonement to a mind accustomed to 
contemplate the nature and the obligation of law. It is no 
secret to you that my own mind was early skeptical on the 
whole subject of religion, and I may say to you now that on 
no doctrine of the Christian faith have I found that early 
skepticism give me more embarrassment than on the doc- 
trine of the atonement. This book is the result of my best 
efforts to meet the difficulties, in this aspect of the subject, 
which have occurred to me, and which have so much per- 
plexed me. 

I have supposed that there were other minds in the same 
state in which my own has been, and that they would gladly 
welcome an attempt to solve their difficulties on this great 
subject. In preparing this work I have had in my imagination 
such a mind constantly before me, and have endeavoured — 
with what success others must judge — to answer the questions 
which I have supposed a mind of that class, and in that state, 
would be disposed to ask. 

You will not regard it, I am sure, as an improper reflection 
if I use the plural form and say that we are now approaching 
the period when our earthly labours must terminate. In the 
subject considered in this book we have a common interest, 



DEDICATION. 5 

and in the great doctrine which I have attempted to illustrate 
and defend, I trust we have a common belief, as furnishing 
the ground of our hope of a better life ; and though on the 
nature of law and government I could hope to say nothing 
which would be worthy of your attention, yet on the method 
adopted in the plan of redemption of meeting embarrass- 
ments which are universally felt in administering justice, 
and in dispensing pardon, I may, perhaps, have said some- 
thing not wholly unworthy of your regard. However that 
may be, the sending forth of this volume to the world — per- 
haps the last which I shall ever submit to that indulgent 
public for whose favours I cannot be sufficiently thankful — 
furnishes me an opportunity of expressing the earnest wish 
that the evening of your life may be as serene and happy as 
its mid-day has been prosperous and honoured ; and of giving 
utterance to the hope that, as we began life together, with 
similar aspirations in regard to this world, and with similar 
views on the subject of religion, we may end it with the same 
hope of a future life founded on the atonement made by the 
Eedeemer, and that to us, in a higher state of being, what is 
now dark even in that work may be made bright as the noon- 
day. 

I am, with the highest respect. 

Sincerely and truly yours, 

ALBEET BARNES. 
Philadelphia, Oct. 26, 1858. 



CONTENTS. 



CHAPTER I. 

PAGE 

Presumptive Objectioxs to the Doctrine of the Atone- 
ment 9 



CHAPTER II. 
Difficulties on the Subject of Pardon 30 

CHAPTER III. 

Embarrassments in a Human Government from the Want 

OF AN Atonement 49 

CHAPTER IV. 
The Objects to be Secured by an Atonement 78 

CHAPTER V. 

Probabilities that an Atonement will be provided in 
THE Divine Government, or Grounds of Presump- 
tion that Some Arrangement will be made to 
Meet and Remove the Difficulties in the Way 

op Pardon.... 116 

7 



8 CONTENTS. 



CHAPTEE VI. 

PAGE 

Necessitv of an Atonement 156 



CHAPTEE VII. 
The Nature of the Atonement 218 



CHAPTEE VIII. 

Confirmation of These Views of the Nature of the 

Atonement from the Bible 277 



CHAPTEE IX. 
The Extent of the Atonement 316 



THE ATONEMENT 



RELATIONS TO LAW AND MORAL GOVERNMENT. 



CHAPTER I. 

PRESUMPTIVE OBJECTIONS TO THE DOCTRINE OF 
THE ATONEMENT. 

The difficulties which exist in regard to the Chris- 
tian religion do not pertain so much to the system 
of morals which it inculcates, or to the kind of life 
which it requires, or to the character of its Author, 
or to the measures which he adopted for the propa- 
gation of his religion, or to the doctrine of the im- 
mortality of the soul which it discloses, and its de- 
scription of the future state, as to the fact that men 
are to be saved by the sufferings of the Author of 
the sj^stem as a sacrifice for human guilt. The cha- 
racter of the Author of the system is admitted to 
have been perfect ; the system of morals which he 
taught is conceded to have been of the purest cha- 
racter ; the manner of life which he required in his 
followers, it is not denied, is such as is best adapted 
to secure the happiness of the individual and the 
progress of society ; the general influence of his sys- 



10 THE ATONEMENT. 

tern of religion has been such undoubtedly as to pro- 
mote the welfare of mankind; and the hopes which 
Christianity inspires are such as men must feel that 
it is desirable that they should cherish; but the 
grand difficulty in the system is, that it inculcates 
the idea that an atonement has been made through 
substituted suffering for human guilt, and that some- 
how the salvation of the soul is regarded as connected 
with the death of the Author of the system con- 
sidered as a sacrifice or expiation for crime. What 
is meant by this sacrifice ? To whom was it made ? 
What ends does it accomplish in a system of reli- 
gion? Why is not such a device found in human 
governments ? How does it affect the divine charac- 
ter? And how does it make the pardon of sinners 
more proper than it would otherwise be? What 
was there to prevent the exercise of mercy on the 
part of God which has been removed by the atone- 
ment ? How is pardon more consistent now that an 
atonement has been made than it otherwise would 
have been ? 

These difficulties, if drawn out in detail, would be 
expressed in some such specifications as the follow- 
ing, embodying thoughts which often pass through 
the minds of men when the doctrine of the atone- 
ment is suggested, though not often expressed in 
words : — 

1. The device of an atonement has not been in- 
troduced into any human government ; nor has it 
been found necessary to resort to it. Amidst all the 
methods of disposing of crime and of the criminal 
which have been suggested, it has never occurred to 
any legislator to substitute the sufferings of the in- 



PRESUMPTIVE OBJECTIONS. 11 

nocent in the place of the guilty. The principle has 
never been suggested as one to be acted on, and 
would never have been admitted if suggested, that 
the innocent should be punished for the guilty, or 
that the sufferings of the innocent could accomplish 
the purpose contemplated by the punishment of 
crime. In the numerous methods proposed for the 
maintenance of law; in the plans that have been 
suggested for the prevention of crime or for the 
reformation of the criminal, it has never been sug- 
gested as a practicable scheme in accomplishing 
these ends, that the sufferings of the innocent could 
be substituted for the punishment due to guilt. 
Even if innocent persons could be found who would 
be willing to take the place of the guilty, — if there 
were those of exalted rank and character who would 
consent to take the place of the murderer or the 
traitor, the law would not admit the substitution, 
nor would it be supposed that the interests of justice 
could be secured by such a substitution. Law is 
direct, earnest, personal : it deals with the guilty, 
not with the innocent.* It has demands on the 
offender against justice, not on the guiltless. It 
denounces the criminal, and inflicts punishment 
on him : it knows nothing of substituted suffering or 
of vicarious punishment. It recognises no transfer of 
criminality, and, consequently, no transfer of punish- 
ment. The man who is guilty of arson or forgery is 
imprisoned ; the traitor or the murderer dies. N'o one 
can be required to be imprisoned or put to death in 
their place ; nor would any voluntary submission of 

* 1 Tim. i. 9. 



12 THE ATONEMENT. 

the innocent to the sufferings appointed as the 
penalty of law be accepted in the place of the 
punishment of the offender himself If the law in 
its operations is too severe ; if there are mitigating 
circumstances in the case of which the law in its 
regular operations cannot take cognizance ; or if the 
offender manifest such a spirit of penitence that the 
interests of justice will not suffer by his release, and 
that he may be safely restored to the bosom of the 
community, a 'jpardon' is granted, and the offender 
is discharged. In the act of granting such a pardon, 
however, no substituted sufferings in the place of 
the guilty would be allowed to constitute an argu- 
ment why the pardon should be granted. It is, and it 
must be, in human governments, wholly on other con- 
siderations. But if there are no mitigating circum- 
stances in the case ; if the trial has been just and fair ; 
if there is nothing in the character or deportment of 
the offender to justify the interposition of mercy, the 
law is allowed to take its course, and the offender 
languishes in prison or dies. All the arrangements 
of human governments are based on this ; all that is 
done to maintain the honour of the law is concen- 
trated on this ; all that there is to satisfy the demands 
of justice is founded on this. 'Eo attempt to intro- 
duce substituted sufferings as a method of meeting 
the demand of law is made ; none would be tole- 
rated ; none would be practicable. 

It is not unnatural that these views should influ- 
ence men's minds when they come to the considera- 
tion of the divine administration, and that what 
would be regarded as unnecessary or unjust in a 
human government should be considered as equally 



PRESUMPTIVE OBJECTIONS. 13 

unnecessary or unjust when applied to the govern- 
ment of God. Why, it would be asked, since his 
law is more perfect than any human law, and since 
he is himself more perfect than any human legislator 
or judge, — why, since the penalties of his laws can be 
adjusted more accurately and inflicted more per- 
fectly than is possible under a human administra- 
tion, — why, since it is possible for him to extend par- 
don without any bias on his part, and without any 
danger of error, only in those cases where it ought 
to be extended, and in all cases where it should be, — 
why, since, under his administration, every necessary 
precaution can be taken to prevent any evil from the 
exercise of the pardoning power, should a device like 
that of the atonement be regarded as necessary? 
Since such an arrangement has never been found 
necessary in a human administration, the question 
may be asked with fairness, why, in a system abso- 
lutely perfect, as the divine government is alleged to 
be, and under the administration of one infinitely 
wise and just, should it be found necessary to resort 
to a device which has not been found needful under 
any form of human administration? And if such an 
arrangement as that of an atonement by the substi- 
tuted sufterings of the innocent in place of the guilty 
would be impracticable in a human government, 
and would violate some of the plainest and most 
obvious principles of justice, how can it be introduced 
into the divine administration ? Is that just in God 
which would be unjust in man ? Is that desirable 
in the divine government which would be undesira- 
ble in the best form of human government ? Is that 
needful under a perfect form of administration which 



14 THE ATONEMENT. 

has not been required even in the confessedly imper- 
fect administration of hnman law ? 

2. It would be regarded as an objection to the 
doctrine of the atonement that nothing like this is 
found in the actual administration of the affairs of 
the world under the divine government, or that, in 
the actual course of events, there is no such substi- 
tution of the suffering of the innocent for the guilty 
as is contemplated in the atonement. There is 
evidently, under the divine government, some system 
pertaining to the treatment of sin. Sin has been in 
the world as far back as any historical records go, — 
except the single record that the first man was sin- 
less at first, though of his conduct while sinless we 
have almost no record; and there has been, under 
the divine administration, what may be regarded as 
a course of events in respect to the transgression of 
law. There are sufiicient intimations that there is a 
divine i:)lan in regard to the treatment of sinners. 
In other words, there are certain results which, 
under the divine administration, will follow the 
commission of crime, l^o one could deny that 
various methods have been resorted to to express 
the divine feeliDgs in respect to sin, and designed 
to check its career; but in the actual administra- 
tion of human affairs, apart from revelation, there 
has been no device discernible by which it is con- 
templated to meet the consequences of sin by the 
substituted sufferings of the innocent considered as 
an expiation for guilt. 

The actual government of God in the world pro- 
ceeds on the supposition that the guilty only are to 
be punished. The penalty of the law has reference 



PRESUMPTIVE OBJECTIONS. 15 

only to them. Its threatenings rest on them alone. 
It has no denunciations for the innocent. The evils 
resulting from intemperance as a penalty of law 
do not pertain to the sober; the results of avarice 
belong to the covetous; the consequences of licen- 
tiousness descend on those who violate the laws of 
chastity, and not on the pure. No other system, it 
would be said, would answer the purpose of a 
moral administration. In no other mode could we 
learn from the actual course of events what is the 
character of the moral Governor of the universe. 
'No other system would fairly interpret his cha- 
racter ; under no other system could we learn what 
he is. The stability of his administration, and its 
influence as a moral system, both depend on the 
principle that his creatures shall be treated as they 
deserve, and that guilt and innocence shall not be 
transferred at pleasure ; or, which is the same thing 
in effect, that the results of guilt and innocence 
shall not be made to change places by an arbitrary 
purpose. It would be unjust, it would be said, in a 
righteous system of administration, to treat the 
guilty as if they were innocent, and equally unjust 
to treat the innocent as if they were guilty. The 
objects of a just moral administration are to save the 
innocent from the penalties which come upon the 
guilty and to punish the guilty, and thus to maintain 
the principles of law; not to transfer responsibili- 
ties, penalties, and rewards from one to the other. 
The stability of the divine administration depends 
on the steadiness with which this principle is pur- 
sued, and on the amount of certainty which can be 



16 THE ATONEMENT. 

secured, by a steady administration of fhe principle, 
that this may always be expected to be so. 

The essential idea of an atonement, it would be 
alleged, is a violation of this principle. Contrary 
to all the well-understood arrangements of law and 
justice, — arrangements so essential to the stability 
of the moral administration of the universe, — it 
represents the punishment of the sins of the world 
as passing over from the guilty to the innocent. It 
transfers the entire penalty of the law, in relation 
to the race, from the actual violators of the law to 
one who never violated it in any respect. It arrests 
and changes the regular course of justice, intro- 
ducing an entirely new principle, and one at vari- 
ance with the settled course of things, by transferring 
the entire guilt of the world to the head of the only 
perfectly innocent being who ever dwelt upon the 
earth. 

3. A third difficulty in the atonement considered 
in reference to the administration of the affairs of 
the world is, that it seems to be based on a view 
of the divine character which is un amiable, severe, 
harsh, stern. The doctrine of the atonement, it is 
said, represents God as not disposed to show mercy 
until it is procured by the blood of the innocent; as 
unwilling to pardon on the manifestation of repent- 
ance and reformation, unless the shedding of innocent 
blood shall have intervened; as demanding that the 
exact and the utmost penalty of the law shall be 
inflicted either on the guilty or on a substitute; as, 
in fact, so intent on the infliction of the penalty of 
law that there is in no case a remission of the 
penalty, but merely a transfer of it from the guilty 



PRESUMPTIVE OBJECTIONS. 17 

to the innocerit. According to the representations 
in the plan of the atonement, it would seem that 
no mercy is manifested toward the guilty which is 
not the result of purchase; that none are in fact 
forgiven in reference to whom the whole penalty 
of the law has not been borne by a substitute ; 
that when God seems to forgive it is in appear- 
ance only ; or that he has been changed by the atone- 
ment from a stern and inexorable being to a being 
who is mild and forgiving, and that, after all, even 
this is in appearance only, since he forgives only 
when pardon has been purchased by so much suffer- 
ing for so much guilt, and. since, if the atonement 
had not been made, merc}^ would no more have 
been manifested to man than to rebel angels. 

It would be further said on this point, on the one 
hand, that among men there is no characteristic 
more amiable or more universally commended than 
that which prompts to the forgiveness of offences, 
and, on the other, that there is none more un- 
amiable than that which never forgives; that no 
government is more stern, harsh, and severe than 
that where the pardon of the guilty is never con- 
templated, and where no provision is made for it ; 
that in ordinary life we have constant occasion either 
to manifest the spirit of forgiveness toward others or 
to avail ourselves of it in their forgiving us ; that 
there is nothing that marks a more elevated state of 
social life than that in which this disposition prevails, 
and none that has more decisively the characteristic 
of a state of barbarism than that in which this dispo- 
sition does not exist; and that the real progress of 
society is more distinctly marked by the disposition 

B 2* 



18 THE ATONEMENT. 

to forgive oifenders, and to lay aside the spirit of 
revenge, than by almost any other advance which 
society makes. And it would be further added that 
in the gospel itself there is no spirit that is more 
frequently commended, and no duty that is more 
constantly enjoined, than that of forgiveness; and 
that there is none that is more frequently spoken 
of with entire disapprobation than the opposite.* 
Everywhere, and at all times, we are required to 
manifest a spirit of forgiveness toward our fellow- 
men, no matter how often they offend and no 
matter how aggravated may be the offence. f It 
would be said, moreover, that in the precepts which 
enjoin forgiveness we are constantly referred to the 
example of God himself as a reason why we should 
forgive, and as showing the manner in which we are 
to forgive those who offend us.{ And yet it would 
be asked, — perhaps with no spirit of humility or 
reverence, but it would be asked as indicating what 
is felt by many minds in regard to this subject, — 
What would be the spirit which would be mani- 
fested among men in this respect if they were to 
imitate God according to the representations in the 
atonement? that is, if they were never to forgive 
unless an expiation or an atonement had been made 
for the offence ; if they were to insist that a full 
equivalent should be paid for all the wrong done 
them, either by the offenders themselves or by a 
substitute; if they never pardoned unless in cases 
where the innocent had been made to suffer for the 
guilty ; or even if they should admit the sufferings " 

«■ Matt, xviii. 32, 33. f Matt, xviii. 21, 22. % Matt. vi. 12, 14, 15. 



PRESUMPTIVE OBJECTIONS. 19 

of the innocent at all as a reason why the guilty 
should go unpunished. Could the principle implied 
in the atonement be introduced into the common 
transactions between man and man? Could the 
example of God in this respect, supposing that he 
regards it as necessary in order to a reconciliation 
between him and those who offend against him 
that an atonement should be made, be held up to 
man for imitation ? Could it be made a virtue of a 
high order, or a virtue at all, to imitate the ex- 
ample ? Does not God, in fact, in the New Testa- 
ment, require us to act on a different principle from 
that on which it is alleged that he acts, enjoining it 
on us to forgive those who offend against us freely, 
fully, frankly ? Does he not everywhere in the New 
Testament commend a spirit entirely different from that 
which is necessarily implied in demanding an atone- 
ment ? And can we believe that he would commend 
a spirit that should be based on the same principle 
as his own conduct in requiring an atonement as 
an indispensable condition of restoration to favour ? 
What would be the condition of the world if, in 
every case where an offence is committed between 
man and man, neighbour and neighbour, parent and 
child, a full equivalent for the wrong done should 
be demanded before the offence could be forgiven ? 
if there should be the utmost exaction of justice 
before mercy could be proffered ? and if, when this 
could not be rendered by the offender himself, it 
should be required that an innocent being should 
pay the penalty in order that there might be a 
willingness to forgive? Two neighbours are at 
variance. What would be the effect of introducing a 



20 THE ATONEMENT. 

principle like tlie atonement into their quarrel? In 
default of the offender being able to make an expia- 
tion, or to satisfy the demands of the injured one, 
what would be the effect of requiring that an inno- 
cent third person should be made to suffer all that 
the offender ought himself in justice to endure ? A 
child violates the command of his father and ex- 
poses himself to punishment by his offence. What 
would be the effect in the family if the father should 
refuse to forgive him until an innocent brother had 
manifested a willingness to endure, and had actually 
endured, all that was due to the offender himself? 
These illustrations may seem harsh as in any way 
applicable to the divine arrangement of the atone- 
ment, and they are not intended to be in any 
proper sense an illustration of the real nature of 
that doctrine; but they are designed to illustrate 
what is often passing through the minds of men 
when this subject is suggested, and to show the 
nature of one of the obstacles — though it may not 
be often stated in this form — to the reception of the 
doctrine of the atonement by large classes of men. 
It is not improbable, also, that the common repre- 
sentations of the atonement are often regarded as 
but a modification of an idea in the ancient system 
of Paganism, — the idea of aipipeasing angry gods by 
sacrifice. The essential idea in those sacrifices un- 
doubtedly was that of turning away the anger of 
the gods, — of doing something to mitigate their 
wrath, — of presenting a reason why they should not 
take vengeance, or satiate their indignation in the 
punishment of men. The reason or the considera- 
tion in the case was supposed to lie in the fact that 



I 



PRESUMPTIVE OBJECTIONS. 21 

what was implied in the idea of wrath or vengeance 
had been fully met by the blood and sufierings of the 
innocent victim, and that, therefore, that wrath or 
vengeance was fully appeased or satisfied. The sacri- 
fice of an animal, or of a prisoner taken in battle, 
or of an innocent child, might, it was supposed, 
satisfy the thirst for blood on the part of the of- 
fended deity and render him propitious ; that is, so 
appease his wrath as to make him willing to show 
mercy, or to release the oifender as if he had himself 
borne the full penalty of the law. This idea, as it 
lies in the minds of many persons, cannot be better 
expressed, perhaps, than in the following words, 
copied from a popular work of the present time : — 
"On one side is an offended God, — a somewhat 
grander Jupiter, with all his thunderbolts sus- 
pended over us, and his arm raised to exterminate 
the world. On the other side, sullen, gloomy, half 
terrified, half defiant, trying hard to buy him off, 
are we, his revolted subjects ; and midway between 
stands a grand, inexplainable Personage, whom we 
by some inexplainable means, have persuaded to 
conspire with us to buy a reluctant pardon from an 
angry Jove above."* 

How extensively this view of the nature of the 
atonement prevails, it is, of course, impossible to 
know, for there are deep feelings in the hearts of 
men which are never expressed in language ; but it 
may be presumed that the thoughts suggested 
above are far from being uncommon among men, 



* Representation of the < Broad Church' views, in Blackwood's 
Magazine, July, 1855. 



22 THE ATONEMENT. 

and that many more are cherishing those views 
than would be willing to avow them. E'o one can 
doubt that the thoughts above expressed embody 
substantially the ideas of the Pagan world in regard 
to the wrath of the offended gods and the means of 
appeasing that wrath ; and no one need doubt that 
multitudes are willing to understand the Chris- 
tian doctrine of the atonement as founded on the 
same views, and as designed to effect the same ob- 
ject. ]^or need it be denied that there have been 
representations of the atonement by its advocates and 
friends which would go far to justify this. How 
far these views are a correct representation of the 
doctrine will be considered in another part of this 
work. 

4. A similar difficulty in regard to the atonement 
arises from the idea that it might have been avoided 
altogether ; that God, who has infinite power, could 
have prevented that state of things which has made 
such an interposition necessary, if it is necessary at 
all; that the scheme, in fact, represents God as 
causing or suffering sin to be introduced into the 
world withavieiv to an atonement, or to such a mani- 
festation of his character as would be connected with 
an atonement ; and that the necessity for this would 
have been avoided if he had prevented the existence 
of evil. The atonement, it would be said, is de- 
signed, according to the usual representations of it, 
to furnish an exhibition of the character of God 
such as has been made nowhere else in his dealings 
v>^ith men, or to develop traits of character which 
could not have developed but for this ; and evil was 
allowed to come into the system in order to furnish 



PRESUMPTIVE OBJECTIONS. 23 

a means of the manifestation of the character of God 
which could not have been otherwise made ; as if, 
it would be said, defects had been purposely allowed 
in the construction of a machine in order to furnish 
an occasion to exhibit in a higher degree the skill of 
the inventor : — the existence of the defect^ as well as 
the remedy, both being designed to bring out in its 
fulness the character of the inventor. In accord- 
ance with this view, it would be said that the 
doctrine of the atonement implies that there are 
certain attributes of the divine character which 
could be developed fully in the ordinary works 
of creation and Providence, but that there are cer- 
tain others which can be developed only through 
the medium of sin and misery, and that, as it is de- 
sirable that the divine character should be fully 
displayed, evil has been allowed to come into the 
system in order to furnish an opportunity for the 
exhibition of a method of correcting it, thus 
developing certain attributes of the divine nature 
which could not otherwise be made known. The 
idea, according to the doctrine of the atonement, it 
would be said, seems to be, that there are certain 
attributes of the divine nature — as power, wisdom, 
skill — which can be sufficiently manifested in the 
works of creation contemplated as without sin or 
suffering ; but that there are certain other character- 
istics of the divine mind which, in order to their 
being displayed, need the instrumentality of sin and 
suffering in his creatures, and that the fact that they 
can be displayed through that medium is a sufficient 
reason why the race w^as suffered to fall, and why sin 
and woe were permitted to spread over the world ; or, 



24 THE ATONEMENT. 

in other words, that the benefits oi such a display of the 
diviue character will be a full equivalent for all the 
acknowledged evils resulting from the existence of 
sin, and all the woes that the race will endure. A 
slight illustration of this idea would be, that it is a 
sufficient reason w^hy a wasting and painful disease 
should be suffered to spread through a community, 
that it gives occasion for the display of skill and 
benevolence in the healing art; or that, though 
multitudes suffer and numbers die, still, a sufficient 
reason for allowing the introduction of the disease 
would be found in the manifestation of what could 
not otherwise be known, — the benevolence implied 
in a remedial system. Would not greater benevo- 
lence, it would be asked, be shown hj preventing the 
disease altogether ? Is not manifest injustice done 
to the suffering and the dying in bringing these 
woes upon them in order that there may be a dis- 
play of the benevolent character of others ? Could 
w^e vindicate an arrangement by which a pestilential 
disease should be sent upon a community, sweeping 
multitudes into the grave, in order that there might 
be a display of the mercy implied in the healing 
art? And can we vindicate the arrangement by 
which it was contemplated that a world should fall 
into sin, and an entire race of beings otherwise in- 
nocent and happy be subjected to the evils of apos- 
tasy, and pain and woe spread over the face of a 
beautiful part of creation, and all forms of crime be 
committed, and vast numbers perish forever, in order 
that the character of God might be more fully de- 
veloped ? Is not a grievous wrong thus done to an 
innocent race ? And can there be any equivalent for 



PRESUMPTIVE OBJECTIONS. 25 

such a manifest wrong in the fact that the divine 
character is thus more fully displayed ? Could it be 
an equivalent to the multitudes that should suffer 
from the plague, or the smallpox, or the cholera, 
that a remedy was found out which would display 
in the highest degree the skill of the discoverer, 
and might in fact save multitudes of others from 
the ravages of the disease ? And can any con- 
ceivable exhibition of the divine character, either to 
this world or to the universe at large, be a sufficient 
compensation for the introduction of sin into the 
system, for the wide, deep, and enduring desolations 
that sin has caused? If the question could have 
been submitted to the universe of created intelli- 
gences, can we suppose that any one race among 
those created intelligences could have been found 
who would have seen such manifest good as likely 
to result from the arrangement, that they would 
have been willing to be made the subjects of it? 

And, in connection with this, it would be said 
that the whole scheme, even if it could be vindi- 
cated, would be but an indirect and 'round-about' 
way of reaching an end wholly unlike what we are 
accustomed to see in the arrangements which God 
has made elsewhere. " The thing objected against 
this scheme of the gospel," says Bishop Butler, " is 
that it seems to suppose God was reduced to the 
necessity of a long series of intricate means in order 
to accomplish his ends, the recovering and salvation 
of the world ; in like sort as men, for want of under- 
standing or power, not being able to come at their 
ends directly, are forced to go round-about ways and 
to make use of many perplexed contrivances to 

3 



26 THE ATONEMENT. 

arrive at them."* Why, it would be asked, did not 
God rather prevent the evil altogether, than take 
such a method to remedy it ? Why suffer it to come 
into the system to be checked, if checked at all, by 
a slow process extending through many ages, — a pro- 
cess, too, which has never yet proved itself to be 
effectual? And why, since the evil has come into 
the system, and since men under the system actually 
become guilty, does not God pardon offenders at 
once, if penitent, and restore them to his favour ? 
Why, if he is a benevolent being, is there a necessity 
of some stupendous intermediate work to make even 
repentance acceptable to God, and to dispose him to 
the exercise of mercy ? 

5. It would be said, also, that, after all, we do not 
understand the nature and the bearing of the pro- 
posed remedy. What does it do ? To whom is the 
atonement made? What is its bearing on the cha- 
racter of God ? How is it an equivalent for the 
punishment of the guilty ? In what way does it 
maintain law? In what way does it expiate crime? 
It is admitted, it would be said, by the advocates of 
the atonement themselves, that it is impossible to 
explain its exact relation to the divine character and 
government, or to show hoio it facilitates the work of 
pardon. No one has been able to explain in what way 
it accomplishes the object contemplated; nor is it 
pretended that the manner in which it does this is 
stated in the Bible. It is admitted by its friends, it 
would be said, to be among those mysteries of the 
divine administration which God has not thought 

* Analogy, Part II. ch. iv. 



PRESUMPTIVE OBJECTIONS. 27 

proper to disclose, or which may be wholly beyond 
the power of man to comprehend. Though claimed 
to be among the highest devices of divine wisdom, 
yet no one understands it; though declared to be 
expressive of the highest benevolence, yet no one 
knows how it is so ; though said to be an arrange- 
ment by which God vindicates his justice and main- 
tains the honour of his law, yet no one is able to show 
how it does this ; and though it is asserted that it 
meets evils which it has been found impossible to 
meet in a human administration, yet no one is able to 
show that it would be proper to introduce such a 
system into a human administration if it could be 
done. 

Under these circumstances, and with these diffi- 
culties of the system full in view, it is asked, how 
can it be proposed to mankind as an arrangement 
fitted to meet the evils of sin in the world ? So 
remote does it lie from the ordinary course of things 
in the divine administration ; so unlike is it to what 
occurs or to what is found necessary under any 
form of human government; so difficult is it of 
explanation in its alleged bearing on the divine 
government and character; so mysterious and in- 
comprehensible is it in respect to the question how 
it makes it consistent for God to pardon a sinner ; 
so various are the explanations of its relation to the 
divine character and government by its advocates 
and friends; and so absurd and contradictory are 
many of the theories of the atonement, that, although 
if it be true it is the central doctrine of the system 
of God's moral administration, it leaves, after all, 
more questions unanswered and more difficulties 



28 THE ATONEMENT. 

unresolved thau any other doctrine of natural or 
revealed religion ; and perhaps it would be added 
that it creates or originates many new perplexities 
in an ineffectual attempt to explain those previously 
existing which are so embarrassing to the human 
mind. The difficulties which are felt in regard 
to the atonement present perhaps a more real 
and wide-spread obstacle to the reception of the 
Christian system than any of the avowed argu- 
ments of infidelity, and are operating on large 
classes of men who would not be influenced by the 
common objections of infidelity to the authority of 
the system of revealed truth ; men who would not 
desire to be classed among skeptics, but who see so 
many difficulties in the whole doctrine of the atone- 
ment that they cannot embrace a system of religion 
which makes that doctrine the basis of all hope of 
heaven. 

It caunot be improper, then, to inquire whether 
the atonement, as represented in the Bible, does not 
meet a want which is felt under every form of the 
administration of law; whether it does not remove 
difficulties which have everywhere embarrassed the 
subject of pardon ; whether there are not perplexi- 
ties in administering government everywhere which 
could be removed by such an arrangement as that 
of an atonement; whether the doctrine of the atone- 
ment has not met a want in the human mind which 
has never been met under any other proposed ar- 
rangement; and whether, in devising such a scheme, 
a God of infinite wisdom and beneficence has not 
introduced into his administration that which has 
been felt everywhere to be necessary, but which 



PRESUMPTIVE OBJECTIONS. 29 

has elsewhere been sought in vain. Though there 
may be depths in regard to it which human wisdom 
cannot fathom, yet it may be also true that there are 
difficulties in every system of administering law which 
could be solved in no way but by such an arrange- 
ment as an atonement. To show this will be a 
leading design of this Essay. 



3* 



30 THE ATONEMENT. 



CHAPTER 11. 

DIFFICULTIES ON THE SUBJECT OF PAKDON. 

In the administration of law, few subjects have 
been found more difficult than that of pardon. It 
has been assumed in all governments that law would 
be violated ; and in all, or nearly all, it has been 
assumed that there would be cases in which it would 
be proper that the penalty of the law should not be 
inflicted. In most governments where there is a 
constitution, provision has been made for the exercise 
of pardon in the constitution itself; and it has become 
a settled and well-understood maxim, in administer- 
ing the government, that cases may be expected to 
occur where it would be proper to exercise the par- 
doning power. There have been, indeed, absolute 
tyrants who never showed mercy "to offenders; but 
there has been no government, founded on a con- 
stitution, where it has been an established principle 
that pardon is in no case to be extended to the 
guilty. 

An atonement is founded on the fact that men are 
sinners, or transgressors of law, and on the fact that 
there are difficulties in the way of pardon which can- 
not be overcome but by some such arrangement as 
that which is implied in an atonement. 



DIFFICULTIES ON THE SUBJECT OF PARDON. 31 

The difficulties in the way of pardon must be sub- 
stantially the same in the divine administration as 
in a human government. It is proper, therefore, to 
inquire what those difficulties are : — 

Those difficulties are such as exist in the following 
cases. 1. If pardon should never be extended to the 
guilty, or if the penalty of the law should be always 
rigidly executed. 2. If it is often extended to the 
guilty, or if there is a frequent exercise of the par- 
doning power. 3. If it should always be extended 
to the guilty, or if the penalty of the law were never 
inflicted ; and 4. In any and every case where pardon 
is extended by one — as in this respect he must be — 
above the courts of law, in its bearing on the regular 
administration of justice. 

1. If pardon should never be extended to the guilty, 
or if the penalty of the law should be always rigidly 
executed. It has never, indeed, as already remarked, 
been assumed in any government that this was to be 
a settled principle, however tyrants may in some cases 
have acted on it. But it is clear that it might be 
assumed ; and it is proper, in the consideration of the 
subject, to inquire what consequences would follow 
if it should be assumed and acted on. 

The government in such a case would be one of 
severe and unrelenting Jz<5/ice. It would be, if such 
a thing could be secured, a government of perfect 
law, or a perfect administration of law. The prin- 
ciple would be that an equal and exact penalty for 
the violation of law should be specified ; that the 
exact amount of criminality should be ascertained ; 
that there should be no improper influence exerted 
on the mind of a judge or jury; that a just sentence 



32 THE ATONEMENT. 

should be in all cases prononncecl; and that the law 
should always be suffered to take its course. 

It is easy to conceive that there might be such a 
government, — a government which would be so 
severely and exactly just, that, in this respect, there 
could be no ground of complaint against it. Every 
rule of law might be observed ; every proper degree 
of care be taken that the exact nature of the offence 
might be determined ; every reasonable precaution 
might be resorted to in the admission of evidence ; 
every desirable security for a just trial might be 
granted to an accused person; all that has been re- 
garded as valuable, and that is valuable, in securing 
the rights of men accused of crime, might be main- 
tained ; all that has been worked out in the progress 
of society, now regarded as so essential to justice 
and as such inestimable safeguards for true liberty, 
in the trial by jury, in the writ of habeas corpus, in a 
public trial, in knowing the charge alleged, in con- 
fronting witnesses, in the right of cross-examination, 
might be so observed that on none of these accounts 
could there be a ground of complaint, ^oy in 
reference to the sentence might there be a just 
ground of complaint. It might be neither more nor 
less than was prescribed by the law, neither more 
nor less than exact justice demanded. And, more- 
over, the law might be administered with the utmost 
tenderness on the part of the officers of justice. 
Every thing might be done in the trial to protect the 
rights of the accused ; every thing might be humane 
in the execution of the sentence. I^either a Scroggs 
nor a Jeffreys, it may be supposed, would ever pre- 
side on the bench, and the law might always be 



DIFFICULTIES ON THE SUBJECT OF PARDON. 33 

administered with more than the purity and kindness 
of a Hale. 

But, if it were an admitted principle that pardon 
was never to be extended to the guilty, that principle 
would be at war with some of the finest feelings of 
our nature ; for there is a law of our nature which 
requires that pardon should in some instances be 
extended to the guilty. We are so made that we 
cannot but feel that this is desirable and right. "We 
ourselves are prompted b}^ our nature, as well as by 
the precepts of revelation, to forgive an offender; 
and there is a demand in the very constitution of 
our souls which is not met if this is never done. 
Upright, and firm, and just, as a man may be, yet 
we feel that there is a defect in his character if he is 
only upright, and firm, and just, and that, however we 
may confide in him where questions of right are in- 
volved, he is nevertheless a man who cannot be 
loved. The same would be true in a government. 
However just and equal it might be in its decisions, 
and however impartial it might be in its administra- 
tions, it would, if pardon were never exercised, drive 
its decisions over some of the finest feelings, and be 
in conflict with some of the noblest impulses of our 
nature. For there are cases where pardon is de- 
sirable and proper; cases in which — whatever care 
may have been manifested to secure the ends of 
justice, whatever impartiality may have been evinced 
on the trial, whatever indulgence may have been 
shown to the convicted man, and whatever may have 
been the justice in the verdict of a jury — it is proper 
that there should be an interposition of the pardon- 
ing power to arrest the execution of the law. Uuder 



34 THE ATONEMENT. 

every constitutional government, or every govern- 
'ment of law, men have been convinced of this, and 
accordingly the pardoning power has been lodged 
either with the executive or the judges. This provision 
has been found under all governments but those of 
tyrants ; and a government where this provision was 
not found would be, in the nature of the case, the 
government of a tyrant. Moreover, this has been, 
more than any thing else in the administration of 
the laws, a matter of discretion. How many may 
be pardoned, under what circumstances, with what 
manifestations of feeling on the part of the guilty, 
with what promises or pledges, express or implied, 
if any, and with what expressions of sympathy or 
appeals for pardon on the part of the community in 
behalf of the guilty, if any, have all been points be- 
yond the control of the law. How much or how 
little of these shall be requisite to secure the favour- 
able intervention of the pardoning power, has been a 
point which the law has never attempted to pre- 
scribe. 

That there is a deep feeling in the nature of man 
which demands that the pardoning power shall be 
exercised in some cases, is apparent from the ease 
with which petitions can be procured in any com- 
munity in cases where the exercise of the law, though 
strictly just, has been regarded as too severe. This, 
though sometimes, is not always, mawkish sentimen- 
talism; nor is it always, though it often may be, 
based on an unwillingness that punishment should 
ever be inflicted. It lies deeper than this. It is the 
manifestation of a law of our nature. It arises from 
the fact that we have been endowed with the emo- 



DIFFICULTIES ON THE SUBJECT OF PARDON. 35 

tions of sympathy and compassion as well as witli a 
stern sense of justice. There are cases where every 
benevolent feeling of a community, however resolute 
that community might be in the demands of justice, 
and however deep its convictions might be that the 
law should be sustained, would be gratified by the 
exercise of mercy, and where every feeling of that 
community would be outraged if such clemency 
were never shown. Such cases are too well known 
to require a distinct specification. The considera- 
tions which appeal to a community in such cases are 
those which are derived from the great age, or the 
tender age, or the sex, of the guilty ; from the circum- 
stances of temptation under which the crime was 
committed ; from the want of education or the mental 
feebleness of the criminal ; from the fact that a family 
may be dependent on him ; from the impaired health 
of the prisoner; from the belief that the ends of jus- 
tice may be secured by the mere fact of his condem- 
nation without inflicting on him the sentence ; from 
the conduct of a prisoner after conviction, and the 
belief that he has so reformed that it may be safe to 
restore him again to his family and to the commu- 
nity ; perhaps from the former public services of the 
guilty man. In all such cases it is left for the exe- 
cutive to judge as to the propriety of remitting the 
sentence of the law ; in reference to such cases it 
would be an outrage on all the finer feelings of our 
nature if there were no provision to meet them and 
if the law was always inexorably to take its course. 

It follows from this that in a government in which 
there was no provision for pardon in any case, 
though it might be strictly jws^, and though it might 



36 THE ATONEMENT. 

in this respect deserve the confidence of mankind, 
it would violate some of the noblest principles 
that have been implanted in the soul of man. It 
would contemplate man not as he is, but as a being 
destitute of compassion, sympathy, and kindness. 
It would regard him not as possessing, in connection 
with a sense of justice, a feeling of humanity, but as 
endowed with a mere sense of justice, — stern, severe, 
inexorable. 

But this is not man ; this is not society. Man has 
been formed in a difierent manner, and society is 
made up of different materials. There are in the 
bosoms of individual men and in society different 
elements ; and none of them can be safely disregarded 
even in the strictest administration of law. Man, 
individual or associated, is not all intellect, nor is 
his only characteristic that of a stern sense of justice. 
He has a heart as well as a head, and there is in his 
bosom a sense of humanity as well as a sense of 
right. There are demands in his nature for the 
exercise of sympathy and forgiveness as well as for 
the exercise of justice and the maintenance of law; 
and a government, a court, or an individual, where 
these are ignored or disregarded, violates some of the 
noblest principles of our nature and some of the most 
important arrangements of the Creator. This feeling 
of our nature — this demand for the exercise of sym- 
pathy, compassion, and forgiveness, has led to the 
conviction already adverted to, that there should he, 
in all human governments, some arrangement for 
the remission of the penalty of the law in certain 
cases, or to the conviction that the law should not 
in all instances be rigidly and sternly executed, and 



DIFFICULTIES ON THE SUBJECT OF PARDON. 3T 

is the reason why a power of pardon has been 
lodged in the hands of the executive or the judges. 

May it not be added also, since God has implanted 
this feeling so deeply in the human soul, and made 
the manifestation of it so essential to the good of 
society, that it may be inferred that it is a principle 
in his own nature and in his own administration? 
Would he make necessary in a human government 
a principle which has no place in his own ? Would 
he implant in the human soul what has no counter- 
part in his own nature ? Can we suppose that his 
nature is severely and sternljjusty with no elements 
of sympathy, when he has made compassion so 
essential a characteristic in the soul of man, and its 
exercise so indispensable to the welfare of society ? 
And can we avoid, from this consideration, the in- 
ference that there will be found in his nature a dis- 
position to pardon, and that there will be found 
somewhere in his administration an arrangement for 
the exercise of mercy ? As man individually is in 
some proper sense made in the image of God, and 
as man associated with his fellow-man for pur- 
poses of government represents in some proper 
sense the administration of the Great Governor of 
the universe, it may be inferred that a counterpart 
of what is so essential to the character of the indi- 
vidual here, and of what is made so necessary in all 
forms of human administration, will be found to 
exist in the character of the Creator himself, and be 
manifested in a perfect form under his administra- 
tion. 

2. A second difficulty in regard to the manifesta- 
tion of mercy in a human administration occurs if 



38 THE ATONEMENT. 

pardon is often extended to those who are guilt;y-. 
There have been, and there are, forms of administra- 
tion where this in fact occurs. Either from a slight 
sense of the obligations of justice in a community, 
or from lax views of the nature of law, or from a 
mawkish sensibility in regard to punishment, or from 
false forms and views of humanity, or from weak- 
ness, instability, a feeble sense of right, and a false 
compassion in an executive, it sometimes occurs that 
'pardons' are greatly multiplied, and that the con- 
viction of a guilty man constitutes scarcely the 
slightest evidence that the sentence of the law will 
be executed. The decisions of courts are set aside 
on the slightest considerations, and men guilty of 
atrocious and admitted crimes are turned unpunished 
and unreformed again upon the community. The 
evils of this are too obvious to need illustration. 

But there are cases, as has been before remarked, 
where the interposition of the pardoning power 
seems to be demanded by the circumstances of the 
case, and by the appeals to that law of our nature 
which prompts to the exercise of mercy ; cases where 
the rigid sentence of the law would be too severe, or 
where there were mitigating circumstances in the 
commission of the offence, or where the conduct 
of the convicted man seems to furnish evidence 
that all the desirable ends of conviction have been 
obtained, and where it may be hoped that a perma- 
nent reformation has been secured, or where the 
reason or the health of the prisoner is endangered, 
and humanity seems to demand that he should be 
released, and that a heavier infliction than that con- 
templated by the law — the loss of reason, or death 



DIFFICULTIES ON THE SUBJECT OF PARDON. 39 

ill the prison — should not come upon him. In 
these circumstances, as has been remarked before, 
all the promptings of our nature demand that the 
pardoning power should be exercised, and all the 
benevolent feelings of a community are gratified by 
the exercise of executive clemency. 

And yet pardon, under any circumstances, always does 
much to weaken the strong arm of the law. It is a pro- 
clamation that crime may, in certain circumstances, 
be committed with impunity. It is an announce- 
ment to offenders that they have a double hope of 
escaping punishment, — a hope that they will not be 
detected and convicted, and then a hope that if they 
are convicted they may, like others, be partakers 
of the executive clemency. It is manifest that 
this feeling will exist just in proportion to the fre- 
quency with which the pardoning power is exercised. 
Every guilty man discharged from prison becomes 
thus a messenger sent into the community — and 
especially into the community of thieves, robbers, 
pirates, and murderers — to announce that crime 
may be committed with impunity ; that the law is 
not rigid and inexorable in its inflictions, and that 
little is to be apprehended from its threatenings. 
And it is to be observed, further, that the effect of 
one act of pardon will be more deep and wide-spread 
than the effect of the continued punishment of a 
large number of the guilty. The imprisoned or 
executed convict is in a great degree forgotten. If 
imprisoned, he is confined to a cell to which the 
community has no access. The memory of his trial 
and of his conviction passes out of the public recollec- 
tion. He is not seen, except by his keeper, by his 



40 THE ATONEMENT. 

chaplain, and by a few of his friends. By a refine- 
ment, too, in modern prison-discipline, — whether 
wise or not is not now the inquiry, — his very name 
is concealed, and he is only numerically designated. 
Between him and his fellow-prisoners, as far as pos- 
sible, all communication is interdicted. His place 
in the community is forgotten, and every tie that 
bound him to the living world is sundered. As far 
as it is possible, even in the infliction of the punish- 
ment, his person, his name, his very existence, are 
forgotten. He is dead to law, dead to his family, 
dead to the community. And when the time for 
which he was committed to prison is expired, — if it 
does expire, and if he does not die in his cell, un- 
pitied, unreformed, and forgotten, — all possible care 
is taken to obliterate the memory of his name, of 
his crime, of his trial, and of his imprisonment, and 
to restore him, with no recollection of his offence, 
and no suspicion on his character, to the community. 
Often he goes to a place where he is unknown, 
and where, his name having been concealed or being 
changed, every trace of his conviction and his 
punishment is obliterated. And if, in the other 
supposed case, he is executed for his crime, the 
memory of that also soon dies away. The terror or 
the attractiveness of the scene of execution is over ; 
the public sympathy, and with it the public interest 
in him, is exhausted ; a portion of the community 
feel that he died justly, and lose all interest in him ; 
and on the other and the larger portion no impres- 
sion favourable to law and virtue was made by his 
death : he passes out of the sight of the living and 
out of the memory of mankind. 



DIFFICULTIES ON THE SUBJECT OF PARDON. 41 

But not such is the case with a pardoned man. l^o 
attempt is made to conceal the interest which is felt 
in him in securing the arrest of the penalty of the 
law in his case. A deep public sympathy is excited 
in his favour ; the names of the respectable, the vir- 
tuous, and the pious are easily obtained to a petition 
for his pardon ; he acquires a degree of publicity 
and oi popularity which could never have been his if 
he had been a virtuous man ; no attempt is made to 
conceal his name, and he is restored to the commu- 
nity as a public proof that crime may be committed 
with impunity, that tbere are cases where the regu- 
lar sentence of the law is too severe and where 
humanity should be allowed to triumph over justice. 
Every instance of this nature becomes such a procla- 
mation ; and, while the influence of a trial and a 
conviction in favour of the claims of justice may be 
forgotten, the influence of the pardon, as operating 
against the claims of justice, will not soon die away. 
Just in proportion as such instances are multiplied 
do they operate to weaken the strong arm of the 
law, and to proclaim to the community that the law 
may be violated with impunity. 

This effect it has never been possible to prevent 
in a human administration by any safeguards or 
checks ; nor is there any way in which it can be done. 
No practicable devices have been found to arrest or 
counteract the natural effect of a frequent exercise 
of the pardoning power in rendering the administra- 
tion of justice weak and ineffectual, and in furnish- 
ing an encouragement for the commission of crime. 

3. This result would be still more disastrous if 
pardon were always extended to the guilty, or even 



42 THE ATONEMENT. 

if it were proclaimed that pardon could, by any 
arrangement, be extended to all the guilty. In such 
a case, what would be the use of the forms of law, 
of the arrest, indictment, and trial of the guilty, of 
the verdict of a jury, of the sentence of a judge ? 
If in each and every case of such trial there were 
present in the court-room an officer of the executive 
intrusted with pardoning power, or if an instrument 
of pardon were made out and executed before the 
trial, or if a blank form of pardon, properly signed 
and sealed, were always at hand ready to be filled 
up with the name of the man whom a jury should find 
* guilty,' or if it were certain that a pardon would he 
granted, it is evident that the whole process of trial 
would be a farce and the sentence of the law a bug- 
bear. 

Further: in no community would it be safe to 
have all the prison-doors unbarred and the whole 
multitude of convicts thrown upon the world. Who, 
in such a case, in the neighbourhood of a crowded 
prison would sleep calmly at night ? "Who would 
feel for a moment that his property was secure? 
Who would feel that his house and home were safe ? 
that his wife and children could lie down secure? 
There could be no arrangement by which such a 
general jail-delivery could be rendered consistent 
with the safety of society. Ko one would wish 
to live in the vicinity of such a prison. Pro- 
perty would become valueless and the place would 
become a desert ; and though the vast and terrific 
power of thus discharging all the imprisoned con- 
victs in a community has been intrusted to the 
executive in each commonwealth, yet it never has 



DIFFICULTIES ON THE SUBJECT OF PARDON. 43 

been exercised, nor has it ever been contemplated 
that it should be or could be. There is no commu- 
nity in which it would be safe to have all prisons 
thrown open and all the inmates discharged ; nor are 
there any arrangements in the power of man by 
which this could be made safe. If it had ever been 
contemplated that an executive would thus throw 
open all the doors of prisons, the pardoning power 
would never have been granted ; if such a case ever 
should occur in a community, that power would be 
at once withdrawn. At present society is pro- 
tected from this evil by general public opinion, 
and it has not been found necessary to provide any 
special checks against the exercise of the pardoning 
power; but if it should be abused in the manner 
above supposed, the community would find it neces- 
sary at once to provide some suitable and effectual 
restraints against the possibility of an occurrence 
that would render nugatory all the existing arrange- 
ments for the administration of justice, and endanger 
everything that is sacred and valuable in a common- 
wealth. 

Moreover, no community would regard it as safe 
to offer pardon to all criminals on any condition 
whatever. The offer of pardon is, indeed, not now 
made to any one, and the hope of pardon in any case 
is derived only from the fact that the pardoning 
power is lodged with the executive, the judges, or 
the legislature, and from the fact that it is so often 
exercised as to constitute the basis of a hope that it 
nfiay be exercised in other cases also. But it is never 
offered to any one. It is never made avowedly 
dependent on any conditions of penitence, of refor- 



44 THE ATONEMENT. 

mation, or of pledges for future good behaviour. If 
these things become considerations on the ground 
of which pardon is extended to the guilty, it is not 
because it is offered on these conditions, or because 
they could be safely made conditions of pardon, but 
because in such cases they may have their influence 
on the minds of those who are intrusted with the 
pardoning power. But there can be no doubt as to 
what would be the effect if pardon were indiscrimi- 
nately offered to all criminals on any conditions 
whatever. Forthwith all prisons would be filled with 
hypocrites and pretenders, in whose bosoms there 
would be no real reformation, but who would assume 
the appearance of reformation until the pardon was 
obtained. There could be no security for future good 
behaviour ; there' could be no infallible proof of 
genuine reformation; there could be no ground of 
reliance that all the indications of compliance with 
the conditions were not hypocritically assumed for the 
purpose of obtaining a discharge from prison. No 
civil government has the power of originating an 
influence that shall be extended into the future life 
of the convict, and that shall become the guarantee 
that the community will suffer no wrong by the 
indiscriminate discharge of the guilty on the profes- 
sion of repentance and reformation. 

There is not a government on earth that cou.ld 
safely venture to make the unlimited offer of pardon 
which God in the gospel makes to guilty men. 
There it is unlimited. It is on simple conditions, — 
conditions that may be easily complied with by all. 
Interwoven with those conditions there is a security 
for the future good conduct of those who are par- 



DIFFICULTIES ON THE SUBJECT OF PARDON. 45 

doned ; a guarantee to the universe that no wrong 
would be experienced if even all the guilty should be 
pardoned. That offer of pardon excludes none even 
by name, none by description. No man is presumed 
to be so great an offender, to have committed crimes 
of so aggravated a character against God and his 
law, to be so powerful or so dangerous, that it would 
be unsafe to forgive him. In every case, no matter 
how great the crimes have been, it is presumed that 
an influence pervades the arrangement for pardon 
which will secure ever onward the future good con- 
duct of him who is forgiven, and that he who has 
been most distinguished for crime will hereafter be 
as eminent for obedience to the law. What those 
arrangements are, will be the subject of subsequent 
consideration. The remark now made is that it has 
been impossible thus far in the world to introduce 
those arrangements into human legislation, and that, 
consequently, there has been no community where 
a universal offer of pardon could be made to the 
guilty ; no commonwealth where it would be safe to 
throw open all prison-doors and to discharge all 
convicts npon the world. 

4. There is another difiiculty on the subject of 
pardon which must occur in a human administration 
whenever, and with whatever precautions, it may be 
exercised. It is, that it sets aside the decisions of 
the courts, and, by diminishing confidence in their 
wisdom, lessens their influence in the administration 
of the laws. Every act of pardon is, as far as it goes, 
a proclamation either that the law itself is defective, 
or that there has been an error in its administration. 
It is a public statement that there is no tribunal 



46 THE ATONEMENT. 

which can be always confided in ; that there is need 
of a higher power to sit again in judgment on the 
highest decisions of the law, and perhaps to reverse 
them. And it is not merely a rehearing of the case, 
as in a court of error, where all the forms and 
securities of law may be observed ; but it is a re- 
hearing where the precautions which the law has 
thrown around the administration of justice in the 
arraignment, the indictment, the trial by jury, the 
examination of witnesses, and the pleadings in the 
cause, are dispensed with, and where, in most in- 
stances, the case is left, without these forms of 
security, to the decision of a single man. Practically 
the judgment of the court and the decisions of the 
law are declared to be wrong. ITo thing is done to 
assert the authority of the court or to maintain the 
influence of the law while the guilty man is dis- 
charged, and two branches of the government — the 
judicial and the executive — come directly into conflict. 
In every case of pardon it may be supposed that an 
executive would desire to maintain the authority of 
law as administered in the courts of justice, and 
from this consideration, if there were no other, 
would hesitate to interpose ; for the executive never 
cannot interpose without practically doing so much to 
set aside the authority of the law and the regular 
course of justice. It is to be observed, also, that it 
has cost much, in the progress of society, to secure 
an arrangement by which justice may be dispensed, 
and that it is of the highest importance to maintain 
the authority of courts of law. There is value in all 
the arrangements and the processes of justice; in 
the appointment of judges, in the modes of indict- 



DIFFICULTIES ON THE SUBJECT OF PARDON. 4T 

ment, in the trial by jury, in tlie forms of pleading, 
in the respect shown to the sentence of a court. All 
these bear directly on the interests of a community ; 
all are to be regarded as safeguards of justice; all 
are results of long struggles in past ages for the pro- 
tection of rights; and all go into the sense of security 
which a community feels in reference to the nature 
of citizenship. Each one of the arrangements which 
now enter into the administration of justice has been 
the result of a long and fearful struggle in the his- 
tory of the world, or has, in its establishment, con- 
stituted an epoch in the progress of society ; making 
a marked distinction between society as it was before^ 
and as it is afterwards. So it was with the establishment 
of trial by jury in the time of Alfred ; with the rights 
secured by the barons in the Magna Charta ; in the 
writ of habeas corpus in the time of Charles II. ; in 
the abolition of the Star Chamber ; in the arrange- 
ments by which an indictment shall be found by a 
jury before trial; in the points established after so 
long a conflict, that the accused shall meet his 
accuser face to face, and that the witnesses shall be 
examined in open court; in the independence of 
the judges, and in the forms of pleading. The pro- 
gress of society has been marked by the establish- 
ment of these and similar arrangements from age to 
age; and there is not one of the arrangements now 
seen in a court of justice which has not in its in- 
troduction constituted an epoch in the progress of 
the world, and been the result of a severe and pro- 
tracted struggle against oppression and wrong. 

It is of the highest importance to the interests of 
a community that the arrangements which have been 



48 THE ATONEMENT. 

found necessary in the administration of law should 
be sacredly observed ; and yet all are practicallj^ set 
aside in every case of pardon, — for in every such case 
an interference is allowed which is protected by none 
of these safeguards. The interference goes to show 
that, so far as this case is concerned, the respect 
which it is so desirable to maintain for courts of law 
is to be set aside. It is, in fact, an arrangement 
where there is no proper respect for law or for the 
regular administration of law under the safeguards 
secured in the wisdom of past ages. 

Such are some of the difficulties on the subject of 
pardon ; difficulties which occur inevitably if pardon 
is never exercised, if it is often exercised, or if it 
should be alicays extended to the guilty. These 
difficulties it has never been in the power of any 
human wisdom to overcome ; and, whichever of these 
courses has been adopted, evil has always resulted 
under every form of human administration. ISTo 
way has been discovered of so adjusting these points 
as to make the exercise free from difficulty. There has 
been some defect in the practical working of every 
system ; something wanting which it has never been 
in the power of a human legislator to introduce into 
his scheme. There has been everywhere a deep 
conviction that pardon should in certain cases be 
extended to the guilty ; but how it can be done so 
as to secure the interests of justice, so as to maintain 
the power of law, and so as not to be an encourage- 
ment for the commission of crime, is a point which 
has never been settled in any human administra- 
tion. 



EMBARRASSMENTS FROM WANT OF AN ATONEMENT. 49 



CHAPTER III. 

EMBARRASSMENTS IN A HUMAN GOVERNMENT FROM 
THE WANT OF AN ATONEMENT. 

All governments, in the administration of the 
laws, experience such difficulties as are proposed to 
be remedied by an atonement. Whether those diffi- 
culties would be removed hy such a device as that 
of the atonement is a fair question for consideration ; 
but it will be admitted, on the slightest considera- 
tion of the subject, that the difficulties which are 
proposed to be remedied by an atonement actually 
exist in all forms of human administration, and that, 
in spite of any arrangement which can be made by 
human wisdom, they create constant embarrass- 
ment. 

It is important, in order to prepare the way for the 
consideration of the doctrine of the atonement, to 
show what those difficulties are, and what devices 
have been resorted to in order to remove them. 

I. The embarrassments which are felt may be spe- 
cified under four heads : — 

1. The first arises from the difficulty in respect to 
the magistrate, the impossibility of his cherishing 
and carrying out as a magistrate the feelings which 
he is permitted and required to cherish as a man. 
As a man, in his private transactions, he can fully 



50 THE ATONEMENT. 

carry out the promptings of humanity and the prin- 
ciple of religion in forgiving an ofience ; as a magis- 
trate, appointed to administer and execute the laws, 
these feelings are never to be indulged. There springs 
up a conflict between the promptings of his nature 
and the demands of duty ; and one or the other of 
these must be suppressed if he extends pardon to the 
guilty. The difficulty consists in making the pri- 
vate virtues of the man harmonize with the duties 
of the magistrate^ for there are feelings of our 
nature which require us to show mercy to the guilty, 
and it is universally regarded as a virtue for one who 
has been offended or wronged to pardon an oiFender. 
This is a virtue, however, which the magistrate strives 
in vain to transfer as a magistrate to his own bosom. 
Pardon he could freely extend in private life; but 
his public position creates difficulties in indulging 
these feelings which he cannot surmount. All the 
interests of justice would be sacrificed if as a magis- 
trate he should give indulgence to the feelings which 
constitute the highest traits of character in private 
life ; if he were to indulge in that free exercise of 
mercy towards offi3nders which he inculcates as a 
duty on his own children, and which he feels bound 
to manifest as a neighbour or a citizen. On the one 
hand, to be as unwilling in private life to forgive as 
he feels bound to be as a magistrate, would be at 
variance with all the virtues which are inculcated in 
regard to the treatment of others, and with what, 
conscious as we are of imperfection, we are often 
under the necessity of asking from others ; and, on the 
other hand, to transfer these feelings to a bench of 
justice, or to expect an officer of justice to indulge 



EMBARRASSMENTS FROM WANT OF AN ATONEMENT. 51 

them freely, would be to render all the processes 
of trial a farce, and to defeat all the purposes of the 
arraignment of the violators of the law. lS[o arrange- 
ment has been devised by human wisdom by which 
that which is an eminent virtue in private life can be 
transferred to a bench of justice, or by which that 
which is deemed so essential to virtue in private life can 
be made proper in him who administers and executes 
the laws. Every man, therefore, who occupies this 
position must feel — or must act as if he felt — that 
he is constrained to assume a diflerent character from 
that which he deems to be virtuous in private life, 
when he becomes an executor of the laws, or when 
he occupies a position where the interests of justice 
are intrusted to him. 

2. The second source of embarrassment occurs in 
cases where it is desirable that an oftender should 
be pardoned, but where it cannot with propriety be 
done, and the law is suffered to take its course. In 
such a case an injury is done to humanity itself, and 
some of its best dictates are disregarded. There are 
conflicting feelings and interests, and there is no 
way by which they can be reconciled. The convic- 
tions of the necessity of justice in the execution of 
the laws, and the strong promptings of humanity in 
the bosom of the magistrate and in the feelings of 
the community, come into collision, and there is no 
method in which both can be indulged, or in which 
they can be reconciled. The well-known case of 
Dr. Dodd, so frequently referred to by writers on 
this subject, will illustrate this point. He was a 
clergyman. His character and standing before the 
act of forgery charged on him had been unim- 



52 THE ATONEMENT. 

peached. In an evil hour he committed an act of 
forgery, and was sentenced to death. The case at 
once excited strong sympathy throughout the realm. 
The offence was undeniable, and he himself did not 
attempt to deny it. He did not seek, by any dis- 
honest or dishonourable act, to evade the penalty 
of the law, nor did he even avail himself of an 
opportunity of escape which had been purposely 
left open to him. The paper, forged with the 
name of the Earl of Chesterfield, was purposely 
left with him when alone, with the expectation 
and the hope that he would destroy it and thus 
remove all the means of convicting him. But, by 
some strange infatuation, or by design, he omitted 
to do it, and the law pronounced on him the sen- 
tence of death. His fair character hitherto, his 
profession, and the fact that this was his first 
offence, excited the strong sympathies of the nation. 
A petition for his pardon, drawn up by Dr. Johnson, 
and with his name at the head, received at once no 
less than thirty thousand signatures; and all the 
warm feelings of the sovereign himself prompted 
him to clemency. The benevolent feelings of a 
large part of the British nation would have been 
gratified with his pardon. But, on the other hand, 
there was the explicit judgment of the law. There 
was the aggravated character of the offence, — an 
offence tending to destroy all confidence in a com- 
mercial community. The law regarded the crime 
as so heinous; so important was it to prevent the 
commission of the crime in a commercial community; 
so necessary was it to secure confidence in the trans- 
actions between man and man, that it has been said 



EMBARRASSMENTS FROM WANT OP AN ATONEMENT. 53 

that up to that time in England no one guilty of 
that crime had been pardoned. Perhaps, too, his 
profession operated against him, and it was deemed 
desirable that by a striking example it should be 
seen that in no circumstances whatever was indul- 
gence to be given to that offence. The law was 
suffered, therefore, to take its course. The offender 
died, and the world approved the stern decision of 
the sovereign. 

But the embarrassment felt in this case for the want 
of some device like an atonement is apparent. There 
was a manifest want of some arrangement by which 
the benevolent feelings of the nation and of the 
sovereign could be gratified, and by which at the 
same time the interests of justice could be secured. 
On the one hand, there were thousands of pained 
hearts when the guilty man died ; and on the other, 
there would have been thousands of painful apprehen- 
sions about the consequences if he had been suffered 
to live. An atonement, or some arrangement that 
would have secured, at the same time, the gratifica- 
tion of the benevolent feelings of the community, 
the life of the offender, and the interests of justice, 
would have saved the whole difiSculty. 

In every such case there is a source of embarrass- 
ment in the administration of law which it has never 
been in the power of human legislation to remove. 
There are desires of our nature which are not grati- 
fied ; and in the rigid execution of law, however a 
magistrate may comply with the promptings of 
nature in one respect, — that which requires him to 
administer justice, — there are other promptings of 
his nature which are not complied with, — those 

5* 



54 THE ATONEMENT. 

which impel him to mercy. While obeying the 
demands of his nature in one respect, he is doing 
violence to it in another ; nor has it ever been possible 
to make such an arrangement that all the promptings 
of his nature shall be in harmony. 

3. A third source of embarrassment in the admi- 
nistration of justice from the want of some arrange- 
ment like an atonement pertains to the reformation 
or the future conduct of an ofiender. Even sup- 
posing that the interests of justice were fully con- 
sulted, and that at the same time all the promptings 
of compassion in our nature were complied with, still, 
there is a material point for which no arrangement 
is made, in regard to the future conduct of the of- 
fender. If his punishment had secured his reforma- 
tion, and if there were absolute certainty in regard 
to his future good conduct, the exercise of mercy 
would be attended with much fewer embarrassments 
than it is now. The whole aspect of the case would 
be changed, and an approximation would be made at 
least towards a removal of the difficulties already 
suggested. It might be supposed that the ends of 
justice had been so far accomplished in securing his 
reformation that the exercise of the pardoning power 
would not be perilous to the community. A few 
remarks will make this point clear. 

(a.) There is great injustice to a community if an 
offender is discharged with no evidence of repent- 
ance and reformation, and no security that he will 
be subsequently obedient to the laws. This involves 
a positive wrong to a community, because it sets 
aside all the arrangements which have been made 
by that community to detect and punish the guilty 



EMBARRASSMENTS FROM WANT OF AN ATONEMENT. 55 

and to secure itself from the commission of crime, 
and because it jeopards the safety of the community 
by turning upon it a practised oflender with no 
security that he will not repeat his offences. The 
wrong done to the community, therefore, is to be 
measured by all the arrangements which have been 
made to detect and punish offenders, and by all the 
injury which would result if the offence should be 
repeated. For the arrangements made in any com- 
munity for the detection, arrest, trial, conviction, 
and punishment of offenders are among the most 
valuable of all the arrangements of governments ; 
they call into requisition more than almost any other 
arrangement the wisdom of legislators ; they are 
supposed to protect more rights and to furnish more 
security for the peace of a community than any other 
arrangements ; and they constitute, more than any 
thing else, the security on which the community relies 
for the preservation of property, reputation, life, and 
peace. The wrong also is to be measured by all 
that is thus done to endanger the future welfare of 
the community. Every offender discharged from 
prison without evidence of reformation does much 
to render property, life, and reputation insecure, and 
is so far an act of injustice to the community. It is 
practically an act of wrong to the community as 
direct as it would be to establish a school for the 
purpose of training burglars and counterfeiters, in- 
structing them in the arts of fraud and villainy, and 
sending them out thus trained to prey upon the 
community. If there could be some arrangement 
by which the future good conduct of those who are 
pardoned could be secured, the wrong done to the 



56 THE ATONEMENT. 

community would be indeed much less flagrant ; but 
there could be no higher act of injustice to all the 
virtuous and peaceable citizens of a commonwealth, 
and no act that would more certainly endanger all 
the rights that society seeks to secure, than at once 
to discharge all the inmates of the penitentiaries of 
a land with no security for their future good beha- 
viour. 

(b.) Yet it has never been possible by prison-dis- 
cipline so to secure the reformation of convicts as to 
furnish a guarantee for their future good conduct. 
At this point all the arrangements made for reach- 
ing the hearts of convicts, and all the efforts of the 
friends of prison-discipline for securing the reforma- 
tion of convicts, fail ; and, unless some plan securing 
such an effect as is contemplated by an atonement 
in the reformation of the guilty can be devised, must 
forever fail. The reasons for this opinion are the 
following: — 

1. "No certain reliance can be placed on any pro- 
fessed reformation of a convict ; and this w^ould be 
especially true if his discharge were made in any 
way dependent on such a professed reformation. ISTo 
government has ever supposed that it would be a 
safe principle to adopt that an offender should always 
be pardoned on evidence of his repentance and 
reformation. No evidence could be furnished of 
such a reformation that would be a safe ground of 
reliance, for the temptation to hypocrisy and insin- 
cerity in such a prospect would be so great that no 
reliance could be placed on any protestations of a 
purpose of future amendment. . Even the most hard- 
ened offenders would, in such a case, soon learn the 



EMBARRASSMENTS FROM WANT OF AN ATONEMENT. 57 

tears and the language of penitence ; and few would 
they be who would remain in prison if the counter- 
feited expressions of sorrow for sin and the counter- 
feited pledges of future amendment would secure a 
discharge. Even with all the precautions and safe- 
guards introduced into prisons on this point; even 
where there is no promise, or pledge, or even secret 
hope of pardon from reformation, it is sad to reflect 
how few pretended reformations in prison can be 
relied on ; how few are, in fact, sincere and perma- 
nent.* 

2. There is no certainty that punishment will so 
secure the certain reformation of the offender as to 
make it safe to pardon him. The design of punish- 
ment will be a subject for future consideration in 
this essay, as well also the usual effect of punish- 

* The following extract from the Journal of Prison-Discipline and 
Philanthropy, for January, 1857, referring to an actual experiment of 
this kind in one of our States, may be adduced to illustrate the effect 
which would be produced in this respect by the hope of obtaining 
pardon on the manifestation of repentance and reformation : — 

"There are certain periods at which this pardoning tribunal holds 
its session, and these are known to convicts. The officers of the 
State Penitentiary of this same State assured us, not long since, that 
if one should visit the prison shortly before the assembling of this 
court, he might think the convicts were suddenly metamorphosed 
into the most devout religionists. The Bible is in sudden demand. 
The most demure expressions of countenance are assumed, and the 
lamblike deportment of the prisoners would indicate a complete 
reformation. But let the same visitor be present the day after the 
court of pardons adjourns, and he would think the convicts had 
suddenly become demons incarnate. Some are favoured in the dis- 
pensation of mercy ; but others, vexed, chagrined, and disappointed, 
seem bent upon avenging what they call their wrongs ; and it is a task 
of many days for an energetic warden to reduce them to tolerable 
subordination." 



58 THE ATONEMENT. 

ment considered as a means of securing reformation 
or guarding against a repetition of an offence. All 
that it is necessary now to observe is, that such an 
effect cannot be regarded as so certain as to be a 
basis of calculation in reference to the future conduct 
of an offender, or a basis of action in reference to his 
treatment at present. It cannot be assumed in the 
administration of law that punishment will always 
be so efficacious in securing reformation that this 
may be proceeded upon as certain, or that on the 
basis of such, an expectation it will be proper to 
make an arrangement by which convicts may be 
discharged. In all the forms of punishment which 
have been devised, — whether by fines, imprisonment, 
scourging, torture, attainder, banishment, or brand- 
ing, — no method has been found that has been so 
certainly efficacious in securing reformation that it 
could be assumed that this w^ould always be the 
result, or that the professions of reformation under 
the infliction of such penalties could be so relied 
on that they might be regarded as a safe basis of 
action in the treatment of the guilty. Repentance 
and reformation, in fact, occur very seldom as the 
result of punishment. Even the 'profession of repent- 
ance and reformation is a rare thing. We shall 
see in our subsequent inquiries that punishment as 
such has no tendency to produce genuine reformation, 
but that whenever a real reformation occurs in con- 
nection with, an infliction of the penalty of the law, 
it is by some foreign influence, by something which 
has been introduced apart from the punishment, and 
which could never have been secured by the mere 
infliction of the penalty of the law. 



EMBARRASSMENTS FROM WANT OF AN ATONEMENT. 59 

3. Such a power cannot be introduced into 
an act of pardon as shall secure the future good 
conduct of the offender. If this could be done, it is 
obvious that it would be safe then to pardon the 
guilty, — at least, so far as their future good conduct 
is concerned. But this cannot be done. There is 
no certainty or probability that an act of pardon will 
so operate on the mind of one who is pardoned 
as to make his reformation certain ; there is no ten- 
dency in such an act to make it certain. There are 
no principles in human nature on which reliance 
can be placed in securing such a result. We cannot 
so confide in the gratitude of men, or in their 
generous impulses, as to feel any assurance that 
by doing them an act of kindness they will cease, 
to do wrong. However flagrant may have been 
a crime, however clear the evidence that it v/as 
committed, and however it might be supposed that 
an act of clemency in such a case would appeal to 
all that is generous and noble in man, yet facts abun- 
dantly show that no such act of clemency will so 
appeal to his sense of gratitude as to secure the 
future good conduct of the guilty. !N"or can there 
be introduced into the instrument of pardon any 
such influence as to constitute a ground of security 
for the future good conduct of an offender. The 
'presumption is rather that one M^ho had been pu- 
nished, in whatever way he may be discharged from 
punishment, whether by having borne the prescribed 
penalty of the law, or by an act of clemency, will 
feel that he has been wronged by the punishment, 
and will seek an opportunity of avenging himself 
for the wrong. Facts, in the case of those who are 



60 THE ATONEMENT. 

convicted of crime and who are either punished or 
pardoned, abundantly sustain this presumption. 

4. A fourth source of embarrassment in the ad- 
ministration of justice, which no human arrangement 
has been sufficient to overcome, is, that it is impos- 
sible to secure the exercise of ^o/A justice and mercy. 
The one, so far as it is exercised, sets aside the 
other. It is possible to be severely and sternly just, 
and it is possible to be tender, compassionate, and 
merciful ; but it has not been found possible to blend 
the two. We have seen in the previous remarks 
that in our nature there is a demand for both, and 
that cases constantly occur where it is desirable that 
there should be an exercise of both; that is, cases 
of acknowledged crime where it is desirable that the 
offence should be punished, and yet cases so peculiar 
in their nature that it is desirable that there should 
be an exercise of clemency ; cases where all the in- 
terests of justice demand that there should be punish- 
ment, and yet where all the benevolent feelings of 
our nature would be gratified by an act of pardon. 
One of these only can be gratified by the course 
which may be pursued in the administration of law ; 
both cannot be. They conflict with each other. 
The one practically and in effect sets aside the other. 
As a government leans to the one or the other, it is 
stern, severe, and harsh, or weak, inefficient, and 
ineffective. Some of the noblest feelings of our 
nature are overridden and crushed out by the rigid 
execution of law; some of the essential claims 
of justice are set aside by every interposition of 
mercy. There have been no arrangements in society 
for blending the two. There are no such arrange- 



EiMBAKRASSMENTS FROM WANT OF AN ATONEMENT. 61 

ments in the ordinary courts of justice ; there is no 
special tribunal where it is supposed that the two 
can be blended. There are arrangements in abun- 
dance for the administration of justice^ and there are 
arrangements for the exercise of mercy ^ but there are 
none for the blending of the two. So far also as the 
character of one who is intrusted with administering 
the laws is concerned, in proportion as he is inclined 
to the one it is always at the expense of the other. 
He is merciful or just, not merciful and just. The 
one attribute constantly neutralizes the other; and, 
though there are cases in abundance where these 
attributes are manifested separately, there are none 
where they are perfectly combined. Though there 
are humane judges, yet the mere administration of 
law is always stern and rigid. If mercy is to be 
shown it is not by the judge as such; it is reserved 
for some other breast than his, or for his own breast 
when acting in some other capacity. " The consti- 
tution," says Lord Mansfield, when delivering the 
opinion of the court of King's Bench on the outlawry 
of Mr. Wilkes, "does not allow reasons of state to 
influence our judgments. God forbid that it should ! 
The constitution trusts the king with reasons of 
state and policy ; he may stop prosecutions; he may 
pardon offences; it is his to judge whether the law 
or the criminal should yield. We have no election. 
None of us encouraged or approved the commission 
of either of the crimes of which the defendant is con- 
victed ; none of us had any hand in his being prose- 
cuted. We cannot pardon. We are to say what 
we take the law to be : if we do not speak our real 



62 THE ATONEMENT. 

opinions, we prevaricate with God and our own con- 
sciences." 

The departments of justice and mercy have in all 
constitutional and wise governments heen kept dis- 
tinct; and, however the hearts of judges may be 
inclined to mercy, and however cordial they may be 
in commending the guilty to mercy, yet judgment 
and mercy are so distinct in their character, and are 
to be dispensed on so different principles, that the 
law presumes that they cannot both be found united 
in the same bosom, and that they cannot be safely 
intrusted to the same individual. As the law has 
made no arrangement for blending the exercise 
of the two, so it has never presumed that the same 
person is qualified to administer both. 

Such are some of the embarrassments which occur 
in a human administration from the want of an 
atonement. It may be proper, then, — 

11. In the second place, in illustration of this 
point, to refer to some cases which have occurred 
where this difficulty has been felt, and some of the 
devices which have been resorted to to meet it. 

A case occurred in the life of the prophet Daniel, 
which will show what has not unfrequently occurred 
under governments where the law is stern and in- 
flexible. The case was this : Darius, the king, had 
been instigated by crafty counsellors to promulgate 
a law that whoever should ask any petition of any 
god or man for thirty days, except of himself, should 
be cast into a den of lions. (Daniel vi. 7.) Daniel, as 



* Lives of the Chief-Justices of England, by Lord Campbell, vol. ii. 
p. 354. 



EMBARRASSMENTS FROM WANT OF AN ATONEMENT. 63 

was anticipated by those who had proposed the law, 
(for it had been proposed for the very purpose of 
securing his fall from power,) was the first oflender. 
The king now saw that by the law so craftily ob- 
tained he had involved the first ofiScer of the realm 
and a man of unsullied character in ruin, unless 
some way could be devised by which the conse- 
quences of the statute could be averted. Thus it is 
said (verse 14) that " the king was sore displeased 
with himself, and set his heart on Daniel to deliver 
him; and he laboured till the going down of the 
sun to deliver him." His feelings of friendship for 
Daniel prompted him to this ; his convictions of 
what was right urged him to it ; the sense of the 
wrong that he had done in yielding to the enact- 
ment of a law manifestly designed to ruin an inno- 
cent man pressed it upon him. But there were 
insuperable difiiculties in the case. There was the 
stern and absolute law which he had himself enacted. 
There was the settled maxim in regard to the laws of 
the realm that they should not be altered, (verse 8 ;) 
the fixed principle that, having been once enacted, 
they should be allowed to take their course, no mat- 
ter what consequences might follow. There was 
the undoubted fact that Daniel had violated the law, 
— a fact which Daniel himself would not deny, and 
which could not be called in question. There was 
the rank of the offender, and the apprehension of 
the consequences on more humble classes if one so 
exalted should be pardoned after an open and pal- 
X^able violation of the law. There was the effect 
which would follow in regard to the character of the 
monarch himself, if he should thus practically con- 



64 THE ATONEMENT. 

fess that he had been inveigled into the enactment 
of a law designed for a crafty purpose, whose conse- 
quences and bearing he did not himself foresee. In 
view of these considerations, all that could be done 
was to let the law take its course. The most illus- 
trious, the most useful, and the most upright man 
in the kingdom was thus consigned to a most fearful 
doom ; and nothing but the protecting care of God 
saved him when human justice was denied him. 
ITow, on the supposition in this case that the law had 
been as just as it was inexorable, what was needed, 
and what would have met the whole difficulty, was 
some device like an atonement, — some arrangement 
by which the majesty of the law could be asserted 
and its proper influence secured, while at the same 
time the desire of the monarch's heart to release the 
offender could be gratified. 

This case may illustrate what substantially occurs 
always in the administration of law. It is true that 
all law has a penalty ; for if it had not it would be a 
bugbear. It is true that, so far as the administration 
of law is concerned, all law is inexorable ; for, though 
a legislature may change or repeal a law, a court is 
appointed only to administer it, not to set it aside, 
and, so far as a court is concerned, all laws are as 
inexorable as " the laws of the Medes and Persians." 
It is true that in every case where an act of pardon is 
contemplated it is implied that there has been an 
undoubted violation of law; for if this is not so the 
discharge of the man is not an act oi pardon, but of 
justice. And it is true that though all offenders 
have not the rank, the character, or the moral worth 
of Daniel, yet that the mere act of violating a law 



EMBARRASSMENTS FROM WANT OF AN ATONEMENT. 65 

gives a man a prominence which he would not 
otherwise have had; exalts him into a degree of 
conspicuity to which nothing else might elevate 
him ; and gives him a claim to notice which perhaps 
nothing else could. And it is true, also, that in 
numerous cases there are strong appeals made to the 
humanity, the compassion, the kindness, of those 
intrusted with the pardoning power ; that from the 
age, the former character, the standing, the ability to 
be useful, of those who are convicted of crime, the 
operation of the law, though just, seems harsh and 
severe, and a strong appeal is made to mercy. Such 
instances strongly remind us of the case of Darius, 
who " set his heart on Daniel to deliver him, and 
laboured till the going down of the sun to deliver 
him." 

The case of Dr. Dodd, before described,* may be 
again referred to, as another illustration of the em- 
barrassments experienced in the administration of 
a human government for the want of an atonement. 
If in that case, as in the case of Daniel, there could 
have been some device by which, on the one hand, 
the majesty of the law could have been maintained 
and the claims of justice asserted, and by which, on 
the other, the benevolent feelings of the sovereign 
and of the community could have been gratified, it 
is easy to see how the evils would have been avoided 
which were inevitable without it. 

"Whatever may be thought of the arrangement 
proposed in the gospel to meet the case of sinful 
men, it cannot be denied that such an arrangement is 

* Pp. 51, 52, 53. 



bb THE ATONEMENT. 

desirable, nor that embarrassments are constantly 
occurring in human governments for the want of it 
which there has been hitherto no way to overcome. 
The fact that there is no atonement under a human 
administration does not occur because there are no 
cases where it would be desirable, or because no em- 
barrassments arise from the want of it, but because 
the legislator can make no such provision. It is 
above him. Even if the principle were admitted 
that the sufferings of the innocent might be substi- 
tuted in place of the penalty with which the law 
threatens the guilty, there is no one whose suffer- 
ings he can substitute in place of the guilty, and the 
whole arrangement is too elevated and vast for 
him. 

To meet and remove these difficulties, as far as it 
can be done, governments are often constrained to 
resort to clumsy, ineffectual, and even cruel, devices. 
Of these the two principal have been substitution and 
retaliation. 

(1.) Substitution. — This has not often indeed been 
resorted to, for it has not been easy to find a substi- 
tute, nor has it been easy to perceive how substituted 
suffering could satisfy the demands of the law, or 
secure the ends of the penalty threatened to the 
offender himself. We shall see, indeed, in a subse- 
quent part of this Essay, that the principle involved 
in such a substitution is not unfrequently developed 
in the actual course of events under the divine ad- 
ministration ; but it has not been practicable for a 
human government to adojpt the principle and to in- 
corporate it into the regular administration of the 
laws. A single instance may illustrate the difficulty 



EMBARRASSMENTS FROM WANT OF AN ATONEMENT. 67 

of doing this, and may show how clumsy, ineffectual, 
and impracticable the attempt is when men resort 
to substituted sufferings to screen the guilty from 
punishment. 

The King of the Locrians made a law that the 
adulterer should be punished with the loss of both 
his eyes. His son was the first offender; and the 
father, to save his son from the infliction of the 
penalty and yet to secure the honour of the law, 
determined that he himself would lose one eye and 
that his son should lose another. But, whatever 
might be the effect of a single instance of this kind 
on the offender or on the community, it was still 
far from mxCeting the difficulties which occur in 
the administration of justice, and from removing 
the embarrassments which, as we have seen, press 
on all governments. For this was not what the 
law required; it was not what the case demanded. 
The penalty was simply divided, and yet was such 
that it was not in fact inflicted at all ; for the 
essential idea in the penalty was that of a total 
loss of sight, — which occurred to neither the father 
nor the son. If the father had submitted to the 
loss of both his eyes, the case would have been 
more nearly met. But even then it would have 
lacked an essential thing in all the proper demands 
for an atonement. It could not be repeated, and 
the influence of it could be properly applicable only 
to this one case. Besides, it had necessarily no 
efficacy in bringing his son to repentance and se- 
curing his future good conduct. The threatening of 
the loss of the other eye, and of total blindness, 
might indeed have deterred him; but that would be 



68 THE ATONEMENT. 

a new penalty, to operate as any other penalty would, 
deriving no power from the substituted sufferings 
of the father in this case. Moreover, even if it had 
been effectual in this case, it could not be expected 
to operate in other instances to deter from crime, 
for, in the very nature of the case, it was limited in 
its intention and influence to this single instance, 
and any merit which there might be in it could 
not be transferred to others. Further, the crime 
was not atoned for. Just as much suffering was 
supposed to be endured as would have been if 
the whole penalty had been inflicted on the son ; 
and the effect was simply that a pari was trans- 
ferred from the guilty to the innocent. So far as 
the suffering threatened by the law was concerned, 
it was all inflicted, and in that respect the penalty was 
completely exhausted. There was no gain of happi- 
ness, there was no diminution of suffering, there 
was no advantage on the whole; for if the exact 
amount of suffering is to be endured, it is obvious 
that there is no gain secured by the arrangement, 
and that it is better that it should be endured 
by the guilty than by the innocent. Besides, as 
already remarked, the arrangement secured neces- 
sarily no change in the oftender. It might be 
hoped, indeed, that a son would be affected by see- 
ing a father voluntarily endure such a calamity to 
save him from the full penalty of the law; but it 
is obvious that there could be no security that it 
would have this effect on him, and still less that it 
would have such an effect on others. Indeed, it 
would not be probable that in regard to the reforma- 
tion of others it would produce any effect whatever. 



EMBARRASSMENTS FROM WANT OF AN ATONEMENT. 69 

It might deter others from crime by the apprehen- 
sion that, if the sovereign was so determined to exe- 
cute the law as to divide its penalty between his 
own son and himself, it might be presumed that 
in all other cases it would be rigidly enforced ; but 
neither in the case of his son, nor of any other 
offenders, would there be the slightest security that 
it would tend to bring them to repentance and to a 
virtuous life. 

(2.) Another device which is resorted to to remove 
the difficulties which occur in the administration of 
justice, is that of retaliation. A tragedy of this 
kind was on the point of being enacted in the 
American Revolution, which would have made the 
hearts of hundreds bleed on both sides of the At- 
lantic. A Captain Pluddy — an American officer 
who commanded a small body of troops in Mon- 
mouth county, 'New Jersey — was taken by the 
British, and shortly afterwards was hanged on the 
heights near Middletown. It was a case so aggra- 
vated, his character was so fair, and it was regarded 
as so important that a repetition of such offences 
should be prevented, that retaliation was resolved on, 
and it was determined that if the leader of the party 
was not given up, an officer of the same rank should 
be selected from the British prisoners in the hands 
of the Americans, and executed. A large number of 
British officers were then in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, 
as prisoners. The selection was to be made by lot. It 
fell on Captain Asgill, an interesting young man of 
nineteen years of age ; and he was conducted towards 
the army to expiate the murder of the American 
officer by his death. He had a mother across the 



70 THE ATONEMENT. 

ocean. She was already borne down with the weight 
of family afflictions; and now, far from home, her 
son, having attained an honourable rank in the 
army, and in the dawn of life, was destined to 
death, — a species of mihtary sacrifice to atone for 
the crimes of his country. Circumstances, indeed, 
not necessary here to be stated, prevented the exe- 
cution of the purpose, and he was discharged; but 
the principle was fully admitted both by "Washington 
and by Congress, and every arrangement had been 
made to execute the purpose.* Calmly indeed a 
brave young man might die even under such circum- 
stances ; but it was not like dying on the field with 
the flag of the enemy folded under his head for a 
pillow, as Wolfe did, or even dying in defeat 
voluntarily shedding his blood, like Montgomery 
on the same plains of Abraham. 

But it is not with the spirit with which a brave 
young man might meet death in such circumstances 
that we are concerned ; it is with the transaction 
itself considered as a human device to avenge a 
wrong, to secure the ends of justice, to repair an 
injury, and to atone for an offence. And here we 
may notice the following things as illustrating this 
and all similar methods of retaliation : — 

(a.) It was a designed substitution, — a substitution 
of an innocent man in the place of the guilty leader 
of the band which had perpetrated the crime. It 
was designed to be in the place of his death, and 
was intended somehow to answer the purpose which 
his death would have answered. The execution of 

^ Irving' s Life of Washington, yoI. iv. pp. 394-397. 



EMBARRASSMENTS FROM WANT OF AN ATONEMENT. 71 

the leader of the party would have been regarded, 
so far as the law is concerned, as an expiation for the 
offence, or as a satisfaction for the crime. If he had 
been delivered up and put to death, the laws of war 
would have had no other claim, nor, according to 
the usages of war, could there have been any other 
claim, on the enemy, l^oi even the friends of the 
murdered man themselves could have demanded 
any other reparation for the wrong that had been 
done to them, and the proposed arrangement — by 
the execution of an innocent man — was intended to 
accomplish, as far as it could be done, the ends that 
would have been secured by the death of the murderer 
himself. It was, therefore, one of the few cases 
attempted in human laws of expiating crime by sub- 
stituted sufferings. 

(6.) It was to the young of&cer himself a palpable 
wrong, a wrong which no consideration could justify. 
He had, so far as this was concerned, committed no 
crime. He had violated no law. He had in no 
sense been guilty of the murder. ~Eoy can it be 
inferred that he had bound himself by any contract, 
express or implied, to serve his country in this man- 
ner. He may, indeed, be presumed to have offered 
himself to die for his country, if such should be his 
lot, on the field of battle, or even in any hard service 
that might be required. His talents, his skill, his 
vigour, his time, his valour, all were, in the proper 
way, to be at the service of his country. But it 
cannot be supposed that by entering the army he 
had ever brought himself under an obligation to 
undergo a shameful death; to have his name con- 
nected with the infamy of the gallows, and to be 



72 THE ATONEMENT. 

hurried by a cold and cruel act to the grave, in the 
morning of life, in order to expiate the crime of an- 
other. Nothing could make this an act of justice to 
him, or ever prevent its being, in all its aspects and 
bearings, a palpable wrong. Whatever benefit his 
country might derive to itself by suffering this ; in 
whatever way it might be made to avenge a wrong 
or make satisfaction for crime, it could not but be to 
him an act of gross and cruel injustice. 

{c.) Such an act of retaliation makes even war 
itself more barbarous and savage. Besides being 
a wrong to him who is selected to suffer, for 
which nothing could compensate, it violates all the 
laws even of 'honour,' deemed so essential in the 
prosecution of war. It crushes at once all the gentle 
and noble feelings of our nature, and inflicts pain 
and wrong on those who ought to be protected. It 
was not merely the young man who was selected to 
be the victim who would suffer : the infliction would 
strike deeper, and would reach those who were in 
no manner implicated in the war, who were in no 
sense under the laws of war, and who could by no 
construction be under obligations to suffer the 
penalty due to crime. After all, the keenest suffer- 
ing in the case might not be that endured by the 
young officer himself, for when he entered the army 
he perhaps expected to die in the service of his 
country : it would be the widowed mother in a dis- 
tant land ; the affectionate and tender sister ; the 
maiden affianced to him and who waited for his 
return with triumph. The chief sorrow from the in- 
fliction would be found in the home made desolate; 
the painful disappointment there ; the embittered 



EMBARRASSMENTS FROM WANT OF AN ATONEMENT. 73 

remembrance in future years of such a day of ca- 
lamity. Could all terminate on Mm, or could even 
his death be remembered in future years as it might 
have been if he had fallen in battle, the case would 
be different ; but when would the sorrow cease, and 
what mitigation could there ever be of it, if he was 
dragged, as if he had been a guilty man, to be mur- 
dered in cold blood to expiate a crime with which 
he had no connection, and for whose commission he 
could in no sense be responsible ? 

[d.) It may be added, that if the matter had been 
of such a nature that he could have submitted to 
death voluntarily, and that his sacrifice could have 
been regarded as an act of generous self-devotion to 
save another from a death as cruel, or more cruel, or 
to save a friend or a foe from danger, — as when one 
perils his life in endeavouring to deliver another 
from a watery grave or from flame, or throws him- 
self into pestilential abodes to minister to the sick 
and dying, and himself falls a victim, — then the 
case would have been different. The aspect of 
cruelty, injustice, and severity would then have 
been wholly removed. It would have assumed the 
character of all that is noble, elevated, and pure. 
In such generous self-sacrifice there is every 
thing to mitigate the sorrows of bereavement ; and 
even the distant widowed mother, the affection- 
ate sister, and the affianced bride would find 
consolation in such an act. The idea of volunta- 
riness would change at once the whole nature 
of the transaction, and impart consolation in the 
remembrance of it in the scenes of deepest sorrow. 
In the one case the act would convey the idea of 

7 



74 THE ATONEMENT. 

every thing generous and noble ; in the other, it sug- 
gests the idea of all that is cold, repellant, harsh, 
severe. While the act under consideration would 
fail, therefore, in atoning for the crime or expiating 
the offence, it would violate every generous feeling 
of our nature, and serve to perpetuate, extend, and 
magnify all that is cruel and savage in the nature of 
man. 

The difficulties which have been now suggested 
press upon every government in the administration 
of justice; nor has it been possible ever to remove 
them. The two objects of mercy and justice have 
never been blended, and the devices which have 
been resorted to to secure the two have always been 
clumsy and ineffectual, and usually severe and un- 
just. One may easily be secured, — either justice or 
mercy; but frequently one is secured at the expense 
of the other. Justice may be secured, but mercy 
cannot be extended at the same time to the guilty. 
It is mere justice — stern, hard, inexorable justice — 
when a murderer dies on the gallows ; it is cold, iron- 
hearted, and iron-handed right when a man is incar- 
cerated for life in a dungeon ; it becomes a violation 
of all the tender sensibilities of our nature, a thing 
which chills and stuns us, when such a man as the 
youthful Asgill is selected by lot, and when arrange- 
ments are coolly made for his death. Possibly, in 
such a case, one accustomed to the stern laws of war, 
or schooled in the mere rules of justice, may disci- 
pline the urhd.er standing so that it does not revolt at it; 
but he never so disciplines the heart. That main- 
tains an unwavering aversion to all such transac- 
tions ; that never varies in its emotions when such 



EMBARRASSMENTS FROM WANT OF AN ATONEMENT. 75 

transactions are contemplated. Its remonstrances 
may be, indeed, silenced. There may be no clamour, 
and no expressed disapproval. But it is acquiescence 
in stern necessity in a case where the heart feels that 
a wrong is done to all its own sympathies, and that 
a demand of its nature has been disregarded, for 
there is in such cases no such clemency, such kind- 
ness, such compassion, as the heart demands. In the 
mere administration of justice, judges are compelled 
to part with the kindlier feelings of their nature, and 
to lay aside their sympathies as fathers, as brothers, 
as men; jurors are compelled to forget that they are 
endowed with sympathy and that it is part of their 
nature to forgive offenders; executioners are com- 
pelled to forget that he is a man for whom they are 
rearing the gallows, and to suppress all the tender 
emotions of the soul when they send a fellow-being to 
the bar of God. But, on the other hand, it is true, 
mercy might be shown to the guilty. All prisons might 
be thrown open. All convicts might be pardoned. 
The murderer, and the pirate, and the traitor might 
be discharged. But then there are principles of our 
nature which are violated which are as strong and as 
proper as the claims of mercy and compassion. 
There are wrongs committed as real, and violations 
of our nature as certain, as in the sternest and cold- 
est infliction of the mere penalty of the law. In 
doing this, all the demands of justice would be dis- 
regarded, and an egregious wrong would be done 
to a community. It would be of no use that a vigi- 
lant police had ferreted out those who had committed 
crime ; that the process of arraignment and trial had 
been gone through with; that justice had poised her 



76 THE ATONEMENT. 

scales with sure hand and sentenced the guilty man 
to death. All the securities supposed to be import- 
ant to the community in the trial by jury, and in the 
processes of trial, would be of no value ; for they would 
be all at once set aside. In such a state of things, also, 
the best interests of the community would be disre- 
garded. Pardoned, but unreformed, the murderer, 
the burglar, the pirate, the highwayman, the mid- 
night assassin, would be let loose upon the commu- 
nity ; and who could lie calmly on his pillow ? Every 
neighbourhood would be jB.lled with discharged con- 
victs unreformed; and where would property and 
life be safe ? Every sea would swarm with pirates ; 
and what security could there be for the vast trea- 
sures embarked in the pursuits of commerce ? What 
mother could sleep calmly at night, feeling that her 
' sailor-boy' was safe on the ocean ? 

But if an atonement could be made ; if there could 
be such an arrangement that all these varied inte- 
rests could be secured, what a change would be pro- 
duced in the administration of the laws ! If it were 
possible to institute an arrangement which would 
secure a proper expression of the majesty and honour 
of the law and the interests of justice, and, at the 
same time, make it proper to indulge the benevolent 
feelings of the heart; that would send forth all who 
are pardoned, however guilty they may have been, 
thoroughly reformed, prepared to take their places 
in the community as industrious and honest men, 
securing their good behaviour in all time to come, 
it is obvious that an object would be accomplished 
which never has been secured in the administration 
of justice. It would be an object for which the world 



EMBARRASSMENTS FROM WANT OF AN ATONEMENT. 77 

has sighed, and which men have endeavoured to 
secure by the harsh and clumsy devices occasionally 
resorted to in the vain endeavour to blend the ad- 
ministration of justice and the dispensation of mercy. 
Whether that object has been secured in the atone- 
ment made by the Redeemer, is the most momentous 
question that can come before the mind of man. 



7* 



78 THE ATONExMENT. 



CHAPTER IV. 

THE OBJECTS TO BE SECURED BY AN ATONEMENT. 

It is now a very material inquiry, What objects are 
contemplated by an atonement? What is to be 
secured by it ? What is the purpose for which it is 
to be introduced into an administration of govern- 
ment ? 

It is clear, from the foregoing remarks, and from 
the nature of the case, that an atonement must relate 
to one or all of the following things : — to the law 
itself, that its authority may be maintained ; to the 
penalty of the law, that the object contemplated by 
the penalty may be secured; to the offenders in 
whose behalf it is made, or who are to receive the 
avails of it, that it may make their reformation and 
future good conduct certain ; to the community, that 
it may have nothing to apprehend if the guilty are 
pardoned ; and to the character of the lawgiver, that 
that character may stand fair before the world, and 
be such as to inspire confidence, if the just penalty 
of the law is remitted. 

These objects would manifestly comprise all that 
could be effected, or that it would be desirable to 
effect, in administering the law ; and I propose now 



THE OBJECTS OF AN ATONEMENT. 79 

to show why such objects must be contemplated by 
an atonement, or why it is proper to demand that 
they shall be secured if an atonement is made. In 
other words, it is necessary to show that if it is pro- 
posed to release the guilty on the ground of an 
atonement, justice may demand, and the interests 
of a community will require, that these objects shall 
be secured. 

I. The first point relates to the law itself, that its 
authority may be maintained. "Law," says Black- 
stone, "in its most comprehensive sense, signifies a 
rule of action, and is applied indiscriminately to all 
kinds of actions, whether animate or inanimate, 
rational or irrational. This, then, is the general sig- 
nification of law, a rule of action dictated by some 
superior being." "Municipal law is a rule of civil 
conduct prescribed by the supreme power in a state, 
commanding what is right, and prohibiting what is 
wrong."* 

The following are the usual definitions of law : — 

"Lex est ratio summa, quae jubet quae sunt utilia 
et necessaria, et contraria prohibet." — Lord Coke, i. 
17. 

"Lex est justorum, injustorum distinctio, quiddam 
peternum in mente Dei existens; recta ratio summi 
Jo vis." — Cicero, de Legihus, lib. 1 et 2. 

" Lex est regula actuum moralium obligans ad 
id quod rectum est." — Grot., lib. 1, c. 1. 

"Lex est decretum quo superior sibi subditum 
obligat ad istius prescriptum actiones suas com- 

* Com. i. 38, 39, 44. 



80 THE ATONEMENT. 

ponat." — Puff., de Offic. Horn, et Go. secund. Leg. Nat. 
lib. 1, c. 2. 

" Law is a role which an intelligent being setteth 
down for the framing of actions by." — Hooker, EccL 
Pol. B. 1. 

"Lex est sanctio justa jubens honesta, et prohibens 
contraria. ' ' — Bracton. 

From these well-known definitions and descrip- 
tions of law in general, we may make the following 
remarks in regard to its nature and value as bearing 
on the subject before us, and as showing why it is 
necessary to have regard to it in an atonement. 

(1.) Law, in reference to moral actions, expresses 
the sense of the lawgiver as to what is right, and as to 
the value of right. It is the measure of his estimate 
of what should be done, and of the limits by which 
rights are bounded. The promulgation of the law 
indeed determines nothing on the question ichy the 
thing that is commanded is right, or why the thing 
which is prohibited is wrong. So far as the pro- 
mulgation of law is concerned, that may either be 
(a) because the lawgiver wills it ; or (6) because it 
is right or wrong in the nature of things ; or (c) 
because one course of conduct will promote happi- 
ness and the other will lead to misery. Which 
of these is the proper foundation of the distinction 
between right and wrong, and therefore the reason 
why the law is ordained, is a question which has 
never been so determined as to command the assent 
of all men ; but the difference of opinion on these 
points does not affect the position just laid down, — 
that the law expresses the sense of the lawgiver as 
to right and wrong, and that the law is the measure 



THE OBJECTS OE AN ATONEMENT. 81 

of his estimate of what is just. We are always sure 
when we have a law in any case, that we have in that 
the estimate of the lawgiver of what is right; we 
are not certain, and we need not be certain — for that 
would not affect the main point — whether this esti- 
mate is founded on his own will in the case, his 
w^ill being essentially, and from the nature of the 
case, a just estimate of what is right; or on the 
nature of things ; or on the foreseen effects of 
conduct as bearing on the happiness of an individual 
or on society. We may be certain, however, that in 
every case of just law there is some reason why the 
law in that case is what it is ; and in reference to 
the law^s of God we are led ultimately to confide in 
his infinite wisdom and benevolence in founding his 
laws on true reason, though we may not be able 
ourselves to perceive what the reason is.* 

(2.) The value of law, which by the nature of the 
act of atonement is regarded as so important, is seen 
everywhere. All things are placed under law. As 
God made the worlds, and as he has peopled them, and 
as he has multiplied living forms and physical agencies, 
nothing is made lawless. There is not, as the uni- 
verse came from his hand, and as his administration 
is extended over it, one thing in the mineral, the 
vegetable, the animal, or the moral kingdom that is 
placed beyond the control of law or that is not regu- 
lated by law. There is not one that is the produc- 
tion of chance, or that is subject to the play of 

* On this question I may be permitted to refer to my Essay en- 
titled "Inquiries and Suggestions in regard to the Foundation of 
Faith in the Word of God," published by Parry & McMillan, Phila- 
delphia, 1859. 
F 



82 THE ATONEMENT. 

claance ; there is not one that in its creation, its 
position, its developments, or its relations, can be 
resolved into mere contingency. All sciences are 
founded on the belief that the universe is controlled 
b}^ laws, and serve only to develop their nature and 
illustrate their universality and value. There is not 
a crystal that is not formed in accordance with law ; 
not a vegetable that grows not in accordance with 
law ; not a star in the heavens that is not moved in 
accordance with fixed and certain laws ; not an ani- 
mal upon the earth, not a fish in the waters, not a 
bird in the air, that is not subject in its origin, for- 
mation, and mode of living to definite laws ; not a 
man or an angel that is not made subject to law. 
The study of these laws, in reference to the material 
world, constitutes all that there is in natural philoso- 
phy ; in the animal world, all that there is in natural 
history ; in the affinities and repellencies of the par- 
ticles of matter, all that there is in chemistry ; in the 
movements of the heavenly bodies, all that there is 
in astronomy ; in the developments of life, all that 
there is in physiology; in the soul of man, all 
that there is in psychology ; in the operations of 
mind, all that there is in moral philosophy ; in 
the study of the divine nature and the unfolding 
of the divine plans, all that there is in theology. If 
there were not laws applicable to every thing, there 
could be no science, no calculations in regard to the 
future, no basis of confidence in any human effort, 
no encouragement to plough a field, to construct a 
vessel, to navigate the ocean, to attempt to restore 
health when impaired, or to save the soul. All that 
we see, all that we do, all that we hope for, is based 



THE OBJECTS OF AN ATONEMENT. 83 

on the existence of law, and is all an illustration of 
the value of law. The purpose of an atonement, 
therefore, clearly, cannot be to set aside law ; but it 
is to be presumed that if an atonement is made it 
will so far accord with the established course of 
events as to illustrate its importance and value. 

(3.) All these laws are kept within their proper 
bounds, and each class of laws is appealed to and re- 
lied on in the department to which it appertains, 
and is never resorted to to accomplish the purpose 
of law in another department. ' God does not go- 
vern the stars by the ten commandments;' nor does 
he control the diamond, the oak, or the lion by the 
laws by which he controls men and angels. Science 
has arranged, with a good degree of accuracy, all 
the works of nature into certain great departments 
or kingdoms^ — the material, the vegetable, the animal, 
and the intellectual or moral kingdoms, — each sub- 
ject to its own laws according to the nature of the 
objects to be controlled; and, in the actual adminis- 
tration of the universe, these lines are never crossed. 
The laws of the vegetable kingdom are never made, 
nor could they be made, to control the action of 
gravitation, electricity, or the mechanical forces ; 
the laws of instinct are never made to control the 
formation of the cells in the development of plants, 
nor could they be ; the moral law, the law that go- 
verns angels and men, could never be applied to 
control either the material, the vegetable, or the 
animal kingdoms. However one may be made 
tributary to another, the operation of the one never 
invades the appropriate department of the other. 
These departments are never crossed, never interfered 



84 THE ATONEMENT. 

with. They constitute distinct sciences, and, ex- 
cept in miracles, their absolute dominion always 
exists in the departments to w^hich they respectively 
belong. 

An atonement must respect this arrangement, and 
cannot be designed or allowed to disturb this order. 
"Whether any thing like an atonement^ or a comiKnsa- 
iion, could occur in respect to the infraction of a 
physical law, might be a more curious than profitable 
subject of speculation; but an atonement, in the 
proper sense of the term, can have respect only to 
moral law. 

(4.) Moral law has respect to a higher order of 
agencies than any connected with mere matter. It' 
supposes the existence of understanding and of will. 
The objects contemplated by a moral law can be 
secured neither by the laws which pertain to the 
material, the vegetable, or the animal kingdoms ; for 
men and angels cannot be controlled by mere phy- 
sical power or by instincts. The department is 
higher than either of those; and all the arrangements 
in that department differ essentially from those 
which pertain to the other departments of the divine 
administration. Contemplating the subjects of God's 
moral kingdom as endowed with intelligence, will, 
and freedom, the things which are essential in that 
mode of government are two : (a) a rule of conduct 
prescribed by the supreme authority ; and {b) appro- 
priate sanctions, designed to secure obedience and 
to deter from disobedience. The force which is 
applied in the material world — as, for example, in the 
planetary worlds — to secure the observance of law, 
can never be applied here ; for it would destroy the 



THE OBJECTS OF AN ATONEMENT. 85 

very notion of moral agency. In tlie control of the 
planets there are, indeed, rules or laics to secure their 
regular motion, but the observance of those laws 
is secured by mere jpoioer. Beyond that power there 
is nothing in the case ; and when we contemplate all 
that beautiful harmony, and all the arrangements for 
' self-adjustment,' and all the securities for the per- 
manency and good order of the system, we see no- 
thing in the arrangement but wisdom, nothing in 
the execution but power. There is nothing of the 
nature of a sanction or a penalt}^ designed to secure a 
return to order if a law has been violated ; nothing 
that can operate as a motive to secure such a return 
or to deter from a future violation of law. The 
irregularities which would occur if a law should be 
violated would be indeed an expression of the Crea- 
tor's sense of the value of law, not, of course, to the 
material worlds wdiere the law had been departed 
from, but to moral beings who might observe those 
irregularities, and they might thus be among the 
means of illustrating the value of law; but in no 
sense could they operate to deter from a future vio- 
lation of law or as a means of securing a return to 
regularity and order. Laws in a moral government 
are, however, and must be, appointed for these ends. 
They express the Creator's sense of the nature and 
value of right, and they are accompanied with sanc- 
tions which are ordained for the purpose of restrain- 
ing, controlling, and recovering the subjects of those 
laws. These moral laws are designed in their sphere, 
as physical laws are in theirs, to control those who 
are principally the subjects of moral law in all worlds, 
and, as applied to moral agents must have essentially 



86 THE ATONEMENT. 

the same nature and be accompanied with the same 
sanctions. As the worlds which compose our solar 
system, and the more remote and magnificent worlds 
of which even our solar system is a part, are all 
governed by the same simple laws of gravitation, so 
it is reasonable to presume that the most lofty spirits 
before the throne of God, and the inhabitants of far- 
distant worlds, are controlled by the same moral laws 
which are designed to bind and control men, and 
that thus the universe is one. The law of gravitation 
which regulates the fall of a pebble is sufficient to 
control all the material worlds ; the law which re- 
quires love to God, and which is sufficient to control 
the mind of a child, may be all that is necessary to 
bring into subjection and preserve in their place 
the loftiest intellects that the Creator has made. 

(5.) An atonement must be based on the supposi- 
tion that there is evil in the violation of law which 
it is desirable to repair ; and, to obtain any correct 
view of the nature and the design of an atonement, 
it is necessary to have some just apprehension of the 
evils of violated law. Unhappily, our earth has fur- 
nished most painful illustrations of these evils, and, 
were there no other world in which this could 
be seen, a sufficiently full demonstration of it might 
be found in our own. The history of our race has 
been little more than an illustration of the effiscts of 
violating laws; for all the woes and calamities of 
earth have arisen from that cause. It is certain that, 
under the government of a just and holy God, if 
there were no violation of law there would be no 
suffering ; and it is clear, therefore, that, so far as 
our world is concerned, all the suffering which has 



THE OBJECTS OF AN ATONEMENT. 87 

come upon the race has been but a measure of 
the evils of violated law. Whether this is the 
only measure of those evils, or whether there may 
be higher proofs of the evil of a violation of law in 
other worlds, is a distinct question, not needful now 
to be considered. All that is necessary now to ob- 
serve is, that it cannot be doubted, from the history 
of man, that there are evils in the violation of the 
laws of God. The sufferings endured in our world 
can be traced indubitably in numberless instances 
directly to this cause, ^o small portion of the 
bodily pain that exists on the earth can be directly 
traced to it; a great part of the mental suffering 
among men has indubitably the same origin; the 
evils that result from intemperance, and the crimes 
and horrors of war, rapine, piracy, and slavery, grow 
out of this ; the sufferings which come upon the 
guilty as the avowed punishment of crime have the 
same source ; the wretchedness that follows the ex- 
cesses of youth is to be traced to the same cause. 
Even with our limited vision we can see that the 
observance of the laws of God would have prevented 
a great portion of the calamities that have come 
upon men ; and from analogy it is not improper to 
infer, even where we cannot closely follow out the 
connection, that all the woes of earth have been 
caused by the infraction of those laws. From any 
thing that appears, if all those woes could be traced 
up to their real source, it would be found that — re- 
motely it might be, but in fact — all the sorrows of 
earth have had such an origin. If so, then in the 
history of our own world we have a sufficiently 
affecting illustration of the evils of violated law. 



88 THE ATONEMENT. 

^ow, it is certain that an atonement must have 
a bearing on law in all these respects: in assert- 
ing its true nature, in illustrating its value, in check- 
ing and arresting the evils of its violation. In 
other words, it must either tend to maintain law 
or to repair it, either to show its importance or to 
prevent the consequences of its infraction. It must 
meet in the divine administration what has been 
found, as seen in the previous chapter, to be a defect 
in all human governments : it must secure the main- 
tenance of law while pardon is extended to the 
guilty; it must exert such an influence that they 
who are pardoned in virtue of the atonement shall 
become in their future lives obedient to the law. If 
it can secure these things, then, so far as the law is 
concerned, the guilty may be released from the in- 
fliction of its penalty and be restored to the favour 
and friendship of the lawgiver. For, on this suppo- 
sition, all that the law aims at will have been 
accomplished, and no evil will result from dis- 
charging from punishment those who have been 
guilty of its violation. Whether an atonement can 
do this, is another question, to be considered here- 
after. All that is now affirmed is, that it must do 
this, and that if this is done, then, so far as the 
claims of the law are concerned, an oflender may be 
forgiven. 

In no human government, as we have seen, has it 
been found possible to secure this. If a law has 
been violated, the only way devised of maintaining 
its honour is by inflicting the penalty; and when that 
is done, as has been remarked, justice often drives its 
decisions over some of the finest feelings of our na- 



THE OBJECTS OF AN ATONEMENT. 89 

ture ; so far as it is not done, or so far as that penalty 
is remitted by pardon, the strong arm of the law is 
relaxed, and a proclamation is made that the law 
may be violated with impunity. The act of pardon, 
as has been shown, is, for the time, and to the extent 
to which it operates, a setting aside of the authority 
of the law. 

II. The second point to be secured by an atone- 
ment relates to the penalty of the law. 

(1.) Penalty is "the suffering in person or property 
which is annexed by law or judicial decision to the 
commission of a crime, offence, or trespass, as a 
punishment." — Webster. 

Punishment or penaltij is evil inflicted hy a lawgiver^ 
or under his direction, to shoio his sense of the value of 
the law, or of the evil of violating the laio. It is the 
measure of his sense of that value ; it is an expres- 
sion of his conviction of the evil which must neces- 
sarily follow from an infraction of the law. 

It may be well to dwell for a moment on this defi- 
nition ; for, in order to a correct understanding of 
the doctrine of the atonement, it is absolutely neces- 
sar}^ to obtain a just view of the nature and design 
of the penalty of the law. 

And, first, according to this definition, it is 'evil;' 
that is, it is pain, sorrow, suffering, privation, some- 
thing that shall be felt to be an evil, something to be 
dreaded. This may pertain to person or property ; 
it may be confinement in a prison, or it may be a 
fine ; it may be scourging, branding, torture, or the 
pillory ; it may be banishment, or it may be death. 
The essential idea is, that it shall be something that 
is felt to be an evil ; some form of suffering or pri- 

8* 



90 THE ATONEMENT. 

vation that is an object of dread or apprehension, 
and something that may be employed, therefore, to 
deter from the commission of crime. The very design 
of it is to inflict pain ; and consequently, when a fine 
is so light or so disproportionate to a man's property 
that he does not feel it, or when a person is made so 
comfortable in a prison that it will be no object of 
dread, or when the sentiments of a community are 
such that he who is condemned to punishment is re- 
garded as a martyr, it ceases to be punishment, and 
the end of the appointment is defeated. Much as it 
may grate on our sensibilities, and harsh as punish- 
ment in any form seems to many persons to be, and 
much as we shrink from its infliction, yet the very 
end of punishment is to inflict pain, suffering, dis- 
grace, and when that, by any arrangements of society, 
ceases to be the eflect of punishment, its whole pur- 
pose is defeated, and the penalty of the law becomes 
a nullity. 

'Next, it is 'an evil inflicted.' It is the result 
of an appointment; it is brought upon a man by 
design. It does not come as a matter of casualty; 
it is not the result of natural laws. It is not 
because the person who suffers is one of a crowd; 
it is not that he is affected by some general or 
universal law; it is not that he suffers in common 
with others, as when an earthquake rocks a city to 
its foundations, or the pestilence cuts down the aged 
and the young, or war spreads its desolations among 
the peaceable habitations of men : it is ' inflicted' of 
design, and inflicted purposely on the person that 
suffers. The blow is directed at him, and him alone. 
The arrow is not shot into a crowd : it is aimed at 



THE OBJECTS OF AN ATONEMENT. 91 

him ; and when he falls he falls by the intention of 
him who has directed it. 

ITothiug is more important in estimating the nature 
and design of punishment than to remember that it 
is aimed at the offender, and that, in its very nature, 
it is separated essentially from a mere -providential 
dispensation,' a random blow or shot, a casualty. 
The suffering^ indeed, may be the same; but in one 
case it occurs under a general law by which the 
guilty and the innocent are swept away together, in 
the other it occurs under a special and particular 
law which aims at the individual, and at him alone. 

Further, it is ^evil inflicted hy the lawgiver^ or 
under his direction.' It must be the result of his 
appointment, or it cannot be regarded as punish- 
ment. The falling of a tree on a man cannot be 
regarded as punishment unless it can be proved that 
this came upon him as the result of the appointment 
of a lawgiver, and as designed as an expression of 
his sense of the evil of the course of life which the 
man was pursuing, — that is, under the general law 
that men who do certain things may expect that trees 
will fall on them. 

Once more, it is ' evil inflicted by a lawgiver, or 
under his direction, to show his sense of the value 
of law., or of the evil of the violation of law.' That 
may be expressed in the words of a statute; but 
it is more impressively exhibited in the sufierings 
which he appoints as the effect of the violation of 
the law. The evil thus inflicted becomes the mea- 
sure of his sense of the value of the law ; and if the 
amount of evil which attends the infraction of law 



92 THE ATONEMENT. 

is ascertained, we have an infallible mode of esti- 
mating his sense of the evil. 

In this definition I have purposely left out an 
idea which is commonly supposed to be connected 
with the notion of jpenalty or punishment, — that it is 
designed to reform the offender. I shall have occasion 
to show that mere punishment, however it may check 
an offender, has no tendency to reform him, and that 
of itself it never produces that result ; and, if this is 
so, then the reformation of an offender is no part of 
the proper design of the punishment. That looks 
at the violation of law as an evil, and is designed to 
express that fact and that alone. The legislator re- 
gards the law as valuable, and its violation as an 
evil; and he expresses that fact in the appointment 
and infliction of the penalty consequent on its viola- 
tion. A man is hanged, not for purposes of reforma- 
tion, and not to deter others from the commission 
of the same crime, but as a public expression of the 
sense which the lawgiver entertains of the guilt of 
the act of murder. Whatever incidental effects, 
either in reference to the individual who suffers the 
penalty of the law, or to others, may follow from the 
infliction of the penalty, the one prime, main thought 
in the case is that murder is an evil, and the execu- 
tion of the guilty man expresses the sense enter- 
tained by the lawgiver of the nature of the evil. 

(2.) All law has a penalty. We may conceive, 
indeed, that a law could be made, or a rule of con- 
duct prescribed, where there was no penalty appointed 
to express the sense entertained by the lawgiver of 
the evil of the violation of the law. But such a case, 
in fact, has never occurred. "It is but lost labour," 



THE OBJECTS OF AN ATONEMENT. 93 

says Blackstone,* "to say, 'do this, or avoid that,' 
unless we also declare, 'this shall be the consequence 
of your non-compliance.' We must, therefore, 
observe that the main strength and force of a law 
consists in the penalty annexed to it. Herein is 
to be found the principal obligation of human 
laws." 

(a.) As a matter of fact, all laws have penalties. 
Though a penalty, properly speaking, can pertain 
only to a moral law and have respect to moral 
agents, — for physical objects and brutes cannot appre- 
ciate the evil that comes from the infraction of a 
law, — yet the violation of any law is followed by cer- 
tain consequences which may be regarded as an 
expression of the sense entertained by the lawgiver 
of the value of the law. A violation of the laws of 
vegetable growth in a plant is followed by conse- 
quences in the stunted form, or sickly aspect, or de- 
formed appearance of a tree which is expressive of 
the evil of the violation. A violation of the laws of 
health is followed by consequences in the various 
forms of disease which are illustrations of the value 
of the laws of health. So in regard to temperance, 
chastity, honesty. In all the 'kingdoms' of nature 
— material, vegetable, animal, moral — it would not 
be possible to find a single instance in which a law 
is violated, whether in the organic structure, the 
development, or the moral conduct, which will 
not be followed by consequences that should be re- 
garded as an expression of the sense entertained by 
the Great Author of all things of the value of law, 



* Com. i. 57. 



94 THE ATONEMENT. 

and that may not, in that sense, be regarded as a 
penalty. 

(b.) A law without a penalty would be counsel or 
advice, but it would cease to convey the notion of 
law. It might affect us by its being the result of 
the wisdom of him who appointed it ; by leading us 
to follow it from our confidence in his experience, 
integrity, sagacity, or ability, but it would not make 
the impression on us which is always produced by law. 
It might have come down to us as the result of the ob- 
servation of other times, but it would not come down 
to us as law. It might lead us to respect it from 
being the result of the wisdom of legislation in other 
ages, from its being found in the laws of the Medes 
and Persians, or recorded on the twelve tables at 
Rome, or preserved in the codes and Pandects of 
Justinian, but it would be no law to us. It might 
come to us as the result of the imagination or of the 
profound reasoning of ancient or modern times, 
found in the 'Republic' of Plato, or in Godwin's 
Political Justice, or in Mo re's Utopia, but it would 
not be law to us. Even the Ten Commandments 
would cease to have the effect of law on us if 
there were no implied penalty or sanction to express 
the sense of the lawgiver as to their value and as to 
the evil of violating them. We always, though we 
may scarcely have thought of it, make a distinction 
between the laws which are binding on others and 
those which are binding on us, — between the deduc- 
tions of reason and the enactments of law ; for, though 
law is the "essence of reason,"* yet to make law 

* Lord Coke. 



THE OBJECTS OF AN ATONEMENT. 95 

binding it must have proceeded from some appoint- 
ing power and be accompanied with some proper 
sanction. "We always make a distinction, also, be- 
tween advice and law; between counsel and com- 
mand. One has authority, the other has not ; one 
has a penalty, the other has not ; one comes to us as 
the injunction of one w^ho is authorized to require 
our obedience, the other comes to us as the result 
of the wisdom of age or experience. And as law 
without a penalty would fail in securing obedience, 
so it would equally fail in securing respect. The 
laws of any nation, wise as they may be, and salu- 
tary as would be obedience to them, would become 
at once a bugbear if all penalty was removed. They 
would practically bind no one as laios, however much 
they might be respected as advice or as the sugges- 
tions of wisdom. For reasons such as these, as a 
matter of fact, penalties have been connected with 
all laws, human and divine, and those penalties, in 
every case, have been nothing more than an expres- 
sion of the sense entertained by the lawgiver of the 
value of the law and the evil of a violation of it. 

(3.) In reference to the determination of what the 
penalty of a law must be, the following remarks may 
be made : — 

(a.) In just laws it is not arbitrary. That is, it is 
not mere loill; for although the will of the lawgiver 
must determine it, yet that will must itself be founded 
on equity. It is, indeed, the measure of his estimate 
of the value of the law and of the evils of disobe- 
dience, and that is the motive which determines his 
will in affixing the penalty to the law. If he goes 
beyond or falls short of that, the penalty of the law 



96 THE ATONEMENT. 

is unjust. If he should affix anything to the penalty 
of the law beyond what would be necessary in ex- 
pressing his sense of the value of the law and the evil 
of disobedience, it would be so far unjust to the 
community ; and if, in determining the penalty of the 
law, he should fall short of that, and should appoint 
any thing which, when fairly interpreted, would not 
be a just expression of his sense of the value of law 
and the evil of violating it, it would be so far an act 
of injustice to himself; for it would convey a false 
impression of his own estimate of the value of obe- 
dience. There may be other ends of a penalty ; but 
it must express the sense which the lawgiver enter- 
tains of the value of the law. 

(b.) A penalty must be the appointment of the 
lawgiver. As he appoints the law, so it is his to affix 
such a penalty to it as shall express his sense of the 
nature and value of the law. l^o one else has a right 
to do this ; no one else could so do it as to express 
the sense entertained by the lawgiver of the value 
of law. 

(c.) The security that a penalty will be just must 
be found in the character of the lawgiver himself. 
If there is no such security in his character, there 
can be none in regard to the equity of the penalt}^. 
He has entire control in the matter. 'No one can 
require him to appoint a different penalty from 
what he chooses to do. No one can compel him to 
change it ; and, if he has sufficient power, no one can 
prevent its infliction. We are, therefore, under the 
necessity of referring to the character of the law- 
giver as the only security that a penalty will be 
just. 



THE OBJECTS OF AN ATONEMENT. 97 

In human governments all the security that can 
exist on the subject must be in the character of the 
sovereign, or in the constitutional right to change the 
government if the penalties of law are excessive. By a 
change of rulers, by a new constitution, by rebellion 
or revolution, the severe and unjust penalties of law 
may be changed, and a milder system may be esta- 
blished ; and, as a matter of fact, the penalties of 
law have been thus modified and made milder as 
the world advances in civilization. 

Of course, there can be no change in the divine 
administration, for there can be no successful rebel- 
lion, no revolution, no progress of civilization, that 
will affect the penalties of law. There can be no 
new views, the result of experiment or observation, 
which will modify the laws of God. All that could 
ever influence the divine mind in the appointment 
of a penalty was before that mind when the penalty 
was appointed ; and all the security, therefore, that 
the penalty will be right is to be found in the cha- 
racter of God himself, — in the fact that God is per- 
fectly just. If there is a doubt on that point, just in 
proportion to that doubt will there be uncertainty in 
regard to the justice of that penalty ; if it should be 
that God is not perfectly just, then there could be no 
security that the penalty of his law would be right. 
To that conclusion, then, we must ultimately come 
in all our contemplations of the law of God, — that the 
only certainty which we can have of the justice of 
that penalty is to be found in his perfect and holy 
character. 

[d.) In fact, the penalties of the violation of law 
are appointed by God. They are not the result of 



yb THE ATONEMENT. 

chance ; they are not the effect of natural laws ; they 
are not the appointment of any being inferior to 
God. There is, for example, a penalty affixed to 
the violation of the laws of health ; and that penalty 
is the appointment of God. It is so universal that 
it proves that the same lawgiver presides over the 
whole race of mankind; it is so uniform that it 
demonstrates that it is not the result of accident or 
chance ; it has so much of a moral bearing that it 
shows that it is not the result of any material or- 
ganization ; and it is so far susceptible of being 
made the basis of moral dealings with the individual 
himself as to make it plain that it is the appointment 
of God and is designed to accomplish his own plans 
and purposes. The same remarks might be made 
in respect to pride, ambition, selfishness, anger, sen- 
suality, ingratitude. Sooner or later, each and all 
of these are followed by results which are the proper 
measure of his estimate of their nature. 

(4.) The next inquiry is. How is the measure of the 
penalty for the violation of a law to be ascertained? 
In other words, in view of the preceding remarks, 
How shall we know what God has appointed as the 
expression of his sense of the value of the law and 
the evil of its violation ? 

In answer to this question, it may be observed 
that these methods are two : a direct statement on 
the part of the lawgiver, and a correct observation 
of the results of conduct. 

(a.) A direct statement on the part of the law- 
giver, God. If man could look at once at the essence 
of things and see them as God sees them ; if he could 
look into their very nature and see, by contemplating 



THE OBJECTS OF AN ATONEMENT. \)\) 

the germ, all that would ever be developed from it ; 
if he could place himself at the centre of the universe 
and by a glance look through all things, then, as 
God does, he could determine at once what a penalty 
ought to be and what it will be. But this would be 
to possess a degree of knowledge which can belong 
only to God; and, unless man has this, it is clear that 
he cannot determine what a just penalty would be. 
l!Tor, unless he has this, can he determine what a pe- 
nalty may be and ought to be. That must be, therefore, 
high presumption in man when he assumes that he can 
himself determine what a penalty will not be or ought 
not to be, — or, which is the same thing, when he pre- 
sumes to decide that an appointed and revealed 
penalty of law must be unjust. There are many pe- 
nalties of law under the divine administration in this 
world which man would not, from any point of view 
which he occupies, have regarded as proper; and, 
for the same reason, there may be penalties in refer- 
ence to the world to come which man, from any 
point of view which he can occupy, would not have 
himself anticipated, and the reason of which, now 
that they are appointed, he cannot understand. 

To a very great extent the penalties of law are 
made known by the direct statement of the lawgiver. 
This occurs in most of the laws of men, where the 
penalty, leaving a certain amount of discretion to 
the judicial tribunals, is directly specified. Thus, 
the penalty of murder, piracy, and treason is fixed ; 
thus, within certain limits, the penalty of arson, 
burglary, larceny, forgery, bigamy, is fixed also. 
So in the Bible there are clear statements in regard 
to the consequences of sin, — that is, statements in re- 



100 THE ATONEMENT. 

gard to the value affixed by God to his law and to 
his sense of the evil of transgression ; statements of 
what will be the consequence of sin on earth, and its 
eternal results beyond the grave. 

(6.) But it is true, also, that, in reference to a large 
part of the actions of man, the nature and extent of 
the penalty for the violation of law is to be ascer- 
tained not by statement, but by observation of the 
consequences of conduct ; of what, in fact, follows in 
the line of the offence. There are many things evi- 
dently of the nature of crime, sin, or wrong, to which 
there is no specific written or promulgated penalty 
attached, and where the fact that there is a penalty, 
as well as the true nature of the penalty, can be 
learned only from the observed effects of conduct. 
In this case it is to be observed that we ascertain not 
what is penalty from the mere sequences of events; 
we do not infer properly that any one thing is the 
penalty of a certain action because it follows it 
directly in respect to time, — for the falling of the 
tower of Siloam was not proof that the eighteen on 
whom it fell were peculiarly guilty, and the calami- 
ties which befall a city in an earthquake or a nation 
in pestilence are not proof that all those who suffer 
are universally guilty ; but the things which define the 
relation of crime and the penalty must be connected 
as antecedent and consequent; they must pertain to 
the same individual, — for one man cannot be punished 
for the crime of another ; they must be in the line 
of the offence ; the one must follow so directly and 
so constantly from the other as to indicate cause and 
effect ; and the whole must bear such marks of being 
the appointment of a legislator as to show that the 



THE OBJECTS OF AN ATONEMENT. 101 

consequences of conduct in any specified case are an 
indication of his will or purpose in the matter. In 
this way we ascertain what are the penalties of in- 
temperance, licentiousness, dishonesty, fraud, anger, 
gluttony ; for they are followed by such consequences 
as show that God intended to mark them with his 
displeasure and to restrain men from them by being 
thus apprized of his displeasure. In these and all 
similar cases, the consequences which follow from 
such conduct are the indication, even where there is 
no revealed statement, of his disapprobation, and are 
to be regarded as the measure of his displeasure. 

To observe carefully these consequences of human 
conduct; to collect, arrange, and record them, has 
been the great business of writers on moral and 
national law. The results of such observation con- 
stitute, in a great measure, the code of morals by 
which men are governed in the world. These results 
are not the basis or foundation of the distinction of 
right and wrong, but they are the indications of what 
is right and wrong, and are, in particular cases, the 
measure of the divine estimate. Thus, if we could 
collect and embody all the results of intemperance 
in any case, those results would be at the same time 
a demonstration of the fact that God regards intem- 
perance as an evil, and would be the measure by 
which we are to estimate the evil. 

It should be added here that, in all cases, such 
penalties, as ascertained by observation, would coin- 
cide with the statements which would be made on 
the subject, if any, in a book of professed revelation. 
If there were a discrepancy between the fact and the 
statement in such a book, it would prove that the 

9« 



102 THE ATONEMENT. 

book could not be from God. If, therefore, the 
facts in regard to the consequences of guilt do not 
accord with the statements in the Bible, that would 
prove that the Bible could not be a divine revela- 
tion. 

(5.) The next remark to be made in regard to the 
penalty of law is, that the subject for whom the law 
is made, and in reference to whom the penalty is 
appointed, may be little qualified to determine what 
the penalty should be, or fitted to pronounce upon 
its justice when it is appointed. A child of four 
years of age may be very little qualified to under- 
stand the justice of the penalty which a parent ap- 
points for the violation of his laws, or to appreciate 
the results which the parent designs to bring out of 
the infliction of the penalty. The penalty may ap- 
pear to the child to be altogether disproportionate 
to the offence, and in a great measure undeserved. 
For example, he may see, as yet, little, comparatively, 
of the turpitude of a falsehood, and may not be able 
to see why such a penalty should be appointed for 
such an offence as the parent chooses to inflict. A 
few years may work wonders in regard to that child 
in enabling him to see the justice of a penalty which 
may now appear to him so unequal, severe, or harsh, 
and in a few years he may be in circumstances where 
he will appoint the same penalty for his own children, 
— themselves then as much disqualifled in turn to 
understand the reason and the propriety of the 
penalty as he himself had been. 

In respect to this point, the following remarks 
may be made : — 

{a.) It is to be presumed, as in the case of the 



THE OBJECTS OF AN ATONEMENT. 103 

cliild above referred to, that the subjects of the law 
of God may have limited views, and be little qualified 
to see the reason and propriety of the law itself, 
much less to see the reason and propriety of the 
penalty of the law. 

(6.) All the subjects of a law are interested in the 
matter; and therefore it cannot be assumed that 
they will be impartial in their opinions of the 
penalty of a law. Men determine what shall be the 
penalty of the law for others^ not for themselves. Kings 
thus enact laws; legislators in free governments thus 
enact laws ; parents thus enact laws. All laws are 
made for others ; and this fact goes far in securing 
equity and impartiality in adjusting as well as admin- 
istering the penalty. If thieves were to ordain penal- 
ties in regard to theft, and murderers to murder, and 
pirates to piracy, and seducers to seduction, it may 
be presumed that very slight penalties would be 
affixed to each of these offences. ITor would it be 
safe for either of these classes to make laws for the 
others. "We could calculate little on equity if thieves 
should ordain penalties for murderers, or murderers 
for pirates, or pirates for seducers, or from a congress 
of such men in ordaining penalties for any of these 
crimes. Guilt unfits men to appoint just penalties 
to law ; and indulgence in one form of sin disqualifies, 
just so far as it exists, a legislator for determining 
what is due to the violation of the law. Solon, 
Lycurgus, ISTuma, Alfred, had eminent qualifications 
for determining by just legislation what is due 
to the violation of law. Nero, Tiberius, Caligula, 
Alexander YI., Csesar Borgia, Charles 11., had none. 
Of all beings in the universe, therefore, God is best 



104 THE ATONEMENT. 

qualified to determine what is due to the violation 
of law. 

(c.) The subjects of a law can see little of the effects 
of violating law, and are, therefore, little qualified 
to affix its penalty. Some of the effects may be on 
the surface and may be apparent to all. Most of 
the effects are such that they cannot be traced out 
by the subject himself A child, as above remarked, 
can see as yet but little of the effects of a lie ; a sub- 
ject of a civil government may be unable to trace or 
comprehend all the effects of treason ; still less can 
man, as a subject of the divine government, follow 
out and comprehend all the effects of the violation 
of laws of God. Yet it is obvious that, in order to 
affix a penalty with exact justice to law, it is neces- 
sary to take in all those effects and to adjust the 
penalty exactly to them. Hence it is that, from the 
limited views which the subject must take, the 
penalties of law, as we shall see, often appear to be 
harsh and unjust. They are not, in the mind of the 
subject, a proper measure of the evil of the violation 
of the law, and do not determine that evil as he sees 
it. They are the measure of an evil which he 
cannot as yet comprehend, and as it is measured 
by the comprehensive mind of the lawgiver him- 
self 

(6.) It follows from all this, as was suggested 
above, that in many cases — perhaps in most cases — 
the subject w^ould not have affixed the penalty to 
the law which has been actually appointed. There 
are in fact, for example, evils flowing from the sin 
of intemperance which man would not have been 
qualified to appreciate, and which he would not have 



THE OBJECTS OF AN ATONEMENT. 105 

made the basis beforehand in affixing a penalty for 
indulgence in intoxicating drinks. Some penalty, 
perhaps, he would have affixed to the violation of 
law; but it would have been quite different from 
what has actually been appointed. If we can con- 
ceive of a body of men in some now unknown part 
of the world, assembled together to affix an appro- 
priate penalty to the use of alcoholic liquors, when 
the art of distillation was first discovered, and if 
the results which now follow their use had been 
affixed by express legislation as the penalty, the 
world would have started back with horror, and 
would have proclaimed such a penalty to be shock- 
ing and barbarous. If the poverty and wretchedness 
which follow from that use, the degradation of the 
body and the mind, the diseases and disgusting 
developments on the person, the wreck of health, 
reputation, and hope, the sorrows, of wives and 
children, the results in brawls, contentions, and 
strifes, the agonies of a wretched life — the horrors of 
mania-a-potu at death — the curse descending on pos- 
terity — the apprehension of eternal woe, — if these had 
been appointed by such a body of legislators, the sen- 
timentalists of the world, who now start back so 
much at the revealed penalty of the divine law, 
would have pronounced it cruel, horrid, tyran- 
nical. They would have affirmed that nothing 
in the nature of the case could justify such mon- 
strous legislation. And if man, taking his place 
as a counsellor and adviser of the Almighty, could 
have been consulted beforehand, he would have said 
that such a penalty would be so unjust and horrid 
that it could never be appointed. If any legislative 



106 THE ATONEMENT. 

body on earth had actually threatened precisely those 
inflictions which come upon the drunkard, and had 
had the power to carry out the threatening, the go- 
vernment that had done this would have been re- 
garded by the sentimentalists who now impugn the 
divine penalties of law as harsh and unjust, as a most 
severe and savage form of tyranny. 

It follows from this that we are very inadequate 
judges of the penalty which should be affixed to the 
divine law. It follows, also, that we should not be 
surprised to find that a penalty has been appointed 
such as we should not have anticipated, and such as 
we find it difficult to justify or to explain. 

Now, it is obvious that if an atonement is made for 
sin, it must be of such a nature as to secure the ob- 
ject contemplated by the penalty of the law; that is, 
it must be such as to show the sense entertained by 
the Great Legislator of the value of the law, and of 
the evil of violating the law. As the punishment 
of the ofiender himself would have secured this, and 
as this is the very design of the penalty, if an atone- 
ment is contemplated in virtue of which the guilty 
shall be rescued from the infliction of the penalty, 
it is clear that the atonement must answer the same 
end or secure the same result. If it can do this, then 
no objection could arise from this source to the 
pardon of the offender, whatever might arise from 
other sources ; if it cannot do this, or if the atone- 
ment does not do this, then an act of pardon is, in 
fact, a setting aside of the penalty of the law alto- 
gether, and a public proclamation that that penalty 
is not to be regarded as an expression of the sense 
entertained by the legislator of the value of law and 



THE OBJECTS OF AN ATONEMENT. 107 

of the evil of disobedience. A friend of the govern- 
ment of God has a right to expect that an arrange- 
ment for an atonement will secure this end ; an 
enemy of that government — a skeptic — has a right 
to demand that this provision shall be found in that 
which professes to be an atonement. If such an 
arrangement is found in any proposed scheme of 
salvation, it would be so far an evidence of the divine 
origin of the scheme, — for it is far above the wisdom 
of all human schemes ; if it is not found in a professed 
revelation, or if the arrangement would not secure 
this end, it would be a conclusive argument for 
rejecting the scheme, — for a scheme originating in 
infinite wisdom must meet what is so radical a defect 
in all human governments. It is impossible to be- 
lieve that God would solemnly appoint a penalty to 
his law, and then in all his dealings with men act so 
as to set that penalty aside, or so that the fair inter- 
pretation of his acts would be that he regards 
the law as of no value and the violation of it as no 
evil. 

III. The third point in an atonement relates to 
the ofienders in whose behalf an atonement is made, 
— that it may make their reformation and future 
good conduct certain. 

"We have seen that one of the great difficulties of 
pardon — a difficulty which none of the arrangements 
in a human administration has been sufficient to 
remove — arises from the fact that there can be no 
security of the future good conduct of him who is 
pardoned, either from professed repentance and 
reformation, or from the efficacy of the punishment 
inflicted, or from any influence of the act of pardon 



108 THE ATONEMENT. 

itself on the mind of him who is pardoned. We 
have seen that one of the principal evils which results 
from the free exercise of pardon arises from the fact 
that convicts from prisons are sent out without any 
such evidence of their reformation, to prey again upon 
the community. "We have seen that hy no possible 
arrangement, under a human government, would it 
be safe to discharge at once all the convicted felons 
in the penitentiaries in the land. 

To render a community secure would be one of 
the ends of an atonement ; and if such an arrange- 
ment could be made, it would remove one of the 
main difficulties in the way of pardon. That ar- 
rangement in a human government, if it could be 
made, would consist essentially in some scheme for 
securing the reformation and future good conduct 
of the violators of the law who would thus be dis- 
charged. 

l!»fot precisely, indeed, for the same reason, but for 
a reason equally imperative, it is necessary, in a 
scheme of pardon under the divine administra- 
tion, to secure the reformation of the guilty, and to 
obtain a guarantee for their future observance of 
law. It cannot be supposed that God would dis- 
charge the guilty, or release them from the obli- 
gation of the penalty of the law, unless there 
were some ground for believing that they would 
obey the law in time to come. It is possible that 
the very stability of the divine administration may 
depend on this : certainly it would be a reasonable 
expectation among holy beings that God would not 
discharge the guilty and demand that they should 
be received into the * goodly fellowship' of holy 



THE OBJECTS OF AN ATONEMENT. 109 

beings, without some evidence that they were 
thoroughly reformed. What, we may ask, would 
the universe be if the legions of fallen spirits now 
''reserved in everlasting chains, under darkness," 
(Jude 6,) were at once released, and, with all their 
mature powers and ample experience, suffered to 
roam over the face of the earth, or to make their 
way to distant worlds ? What would heaven be if 
the hosts of atheists and scoffers, of murderers and 
seducers, of the profane, the corrupt, and the sensual, 
that are now upon the earth, were admitted at once 
to the blessed abodes of holy beings ? What security 
of happiness could there be in those realms were 
they suddenly peopled with all the polluted and 
the defiled of earth ? 

If, therefore, the guilty are to be released on the 
basis of an atonement, then there must be some pro- 
vision by which the reformation and the future good 
conduct of the guilty will be secured. What that is 
will be the subject of future inquiry. But it is ob- 
vious that it must be something quite different from 
any arrangement which has been made by human 
laws. It must be something in the atonement itself, 
or something secured by the atonement, — some power 
or influence to act on the mind of the guilty to bring 
them to voluntary repentance and reformation, — for 
there can be no other true repentance and reforma- 
tion ; it must be something that shall extend into 
all the future, — embracing eternity itself, — making it 
certain that the offender who is pardoned will never 
again revolt from God. 

lY. The fourth point relates to the community, — 
that its rights may be secured, and that it may have 

10 



110 THE ATONEMENT. 

nothing to apprehend if the guilty are pardoned. 
We have seen that one of the difficulties in regard 
to pardon has respect to the safety of a community. 
That safety is now protected by the arrangements 
which have been made for detecting and punishing 
the guilty. The processes of law are important 
safeguards in defending the rights and securing 
the welfare of a community; and each one of 
those processes, as has been already remarked, 
constituted, when it was introduced, an epoch in the 
history of jurisprudence. The rights of person, pro- 
perty, life, reputation, are dependent on the forms 
of law; on the mode of indictment; on the trial by 
jury; on the confronting of the accuser and the 
accused; on the examination of witnesses in open 
court ; on the writ of habeas corpus; on the vigilance 
of the police and the fidelity of public prosecutors in 
detecting offenders and bringing them to trial. 

Yet, as we have seen, all these are practically set 
aside by an act of pardon. So far as that goes, all 
that the community has done to guard its own 
rights, and to secure public peace and safety, is 
declared to be of no value by each act of pardon. 
An offender, though arrested and tried by those 
forms of law which the community has regarded as 
of so much importance to its own peace and safety, 
is again discharged, with no security whatever that 
the same offence will not be repeated ; with nothing 
to protect the community from the murderer or bur- 
glar who is thus set at liberty. Nothing can be 
introduced into the system that shall secure the com- 
munity from a repetition of the crime for which he 
was arrested, tried, and sentenced. 



THE OBJECTS OF AN ATONEMENT. Ill 

ITow, what, in this respect, is needed in the case 
of pardon is some arrangement by which all the 
interests which it has been the object of the law to 
secure by the regular processes of trial shall be 
secured if pardon is extended to the guilty. To 
make such an atonement admissible as a part of a 
just administration, there must he the same security 
of person, property, reputation, and life which the 
community has sought to obtain by these pro- 
cesses of law. The act of pardon must not be 
capable of an interpretation by which all these, or 
any of these, would be set aside. There must be, 
under an atonement, as much safety as these processes 
of law have been designed to obtain ; and, if this 
could be done, there would be no objection, on this 
account, to the discharge of the guilty; that is, to 
the pardon of one convicted of crime. 

What would thus be requisite in a human govern- 
ment must be equally so in the divine administra- 
tion. If an atonement is made, it must be of such 
a character that the divine declarations in reference 
to the evil of sin ; that the laws which God has 
established in the soul itself to show the guilt 
of transgression, and the arrangements which he 
has appointed in society to keep up the idea of 
that guilt ; that what he has intended to com- 
municate to man in regard to that guilt by the 
threatenings of future woe ; and that the various 
influences which he puts forth to detect and punish 
the guilty here and hereafter, shall not be set aside 
by that work. There must be the same security on 
all these points which there would be if they w^ere 
all carried out and if the guilty were made to ill us- 



112 THE ATONEMENT. 

trate the value of these arrangements by enduring 
themselves the penalty of the law. To all these the 
work of atonement must have reference ; and, if 
these can be secured, the offender may be dis- 
charged. 

Y. The fifth point relates to the character of the 
lawgiver, — that that character may stand fair be- 
fore the world, and be such as to inspire confidence, 
if the penalty of the law is remitted. "We have 
seen that one of the difficulties on the subject 
of pardon has reference to this point. In a case 
where it should be contemplated that it was never to 
be extended to the guilty, the character of the sove- 
reign, though it might he just, would be severe, harsh, 
repellant. A government such as that would be 
would make its way over some of the finest feelings 
of our nature. It would be a government which 
might inspire cold respect, but never love or 
esteem. — In the case where it was supposed that 
pardon would be often extended to the guilty, we 
have seen that it is impossible so to do it as not to 
infringe on the arrangements made for securing the 
regular operation of law. — In a case where pardon 
should be aliuays extended to the guilty, we have 
seen that the eftect would be to encourage crime, 
and to render every interest in a community insecure. 
We have seen, also, that in human arrangements it 
has been found absolutely impossible to hlend the 
two attributes of justice and mercy so that they shall 
be exhibited in proper proportions ; so to dispense 
pardon, or so to administer justice, that the one shall 
not cast a shadow over the other. 

Now, what is needful, if an atonement is made, is, 



THE OBJECTS OF AN ATONEMENT. 113 

that there shall be, througli that atonement, a pro- 
per expression of the character of the lawgiver. It 
must be required and expected that the atonement 
shall somehow represent him as a just being; as the 
enemy of transgression ; as maintaining the princi- 
ples of his own law ; as confirming all that he has 
said in that law in regard to its value, and in regard 
to the evils of its violation. The atonement must 
make the same representation or impression on this 
point which the actual infliction of the penalty would 
do. It would be unjust to the sovereign if it did 
not; that is, if one representation was made by a 
revealed law and its threatened penalties, and an- 
other by the atonement. In other words, it must be 
demanded that, for example, the character of God 
shall not be one thing, as seen in his revealed law 
and its threatened penalty, and another thing in the 
atonement; that, in looking at the atonement, we 
shall not get one impression of the character of God, 
and another from the threatenings of the law ; that 
in the one God shall not be represented as just^ and 
in the other as unjust. In like manner, it may be 
demanded that there shall not be a false impression 
made by the atonement in regard to the mercy of 
God. If he is merciful, then the atonement should 
so represent his character. It should leave that as a 
fair impression on the minds of all who contemplate 
it. There should be in that atonement a real and 
not an imaginary display of mercy. There should 
not be a mere transfer of guilt ; there should not be 
a mere infliction of wrath on the innocent instead 
of the guilty ; there should not be mere punishment 

H 10* 



114 THE ATONEMENT. 

and nothing but pnnishmeut, — the punishment of the 
innocent instead of the guilty ; there should not be 
a mere stern demand of the ' last farthing,' demanded 
of the offender or of a substitute ; there should be 
real mercy, real forgiveness, a real lessening of the 
infliction of pain. If this were not so, then, whether 
a pretended atonement were made or not, the entire 
representation of the character of God in the case 
would be that he was only severely and absolutely 
just, or that there was no mercy blended with justice 
in his character. If God is merciful, then this would 
be a wholly unfair representation of what he is. In 
one word, it is necessary in the work of an atone- 
ment that all the arrangements should be such that 
the divine character, as far as the atonement goes to 
illustrate that, should not be susceptible of a mis- 
representation, or that it should fairly represent 
that character on these points: {a) That God is, 
in fact, just; {h) that he is, at the same time, merci- 
ful ; (c) that he does not connive at sin ; {d) that he 
is not indifferent to sin ; (e) that he actually intends 
to lessen by the atonement the amount of suffering 
and of sin in the universe, and does not mean merely 
to transfer them from the guilty to the innocent. 
If an atonement can be so made as to furnish in 
itself a correct representation of the divine character 
in these respects, it is plain that so far as these 
points are concerned there can be no difficulty in 
pardoning offenders. If an atonement could be 
so made as to furnish a more clear and impress- 
ive demonstration than could be made in any 
other way of what the character of God in these 



THE OBJECTS OF AN ATONEMENT. 115 

respects is, there wculd be this additional reason 
why it might be introduced into the system. 

Whether the atonement proposed in the gospel 
actually is such as to secure these results will be 
the main subject of inquiry in the remainder of this 
Essay. 



116 THE ATONEMENT. 



CHAPTER V. 

PROBABILITIES THAT AN ATONEMENT WILL BE PROVIDED 
IN THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT, OR GROUNDS OF PRE- 
SUMPTION THAT SOME ARRANGEMENT WILL BE MADE 
TO MEET AND REMOVE THE DIFFICULTIES IN THE 
WAY OP PARDON. 

In reference to an atonement for sin, it is quite a 
material inquiry whether there is any antecedent pre- 
sumption or probability that it will be made. That 
is. Is there any thing in the undoubted natural 
arrangements which God has made, or in his actual 
dealings with men, from which it could be in- 
ferred, with any degree of probability, that he 
would at any time interpose, by an extraordinary 
arrangement, to check evil in our world and to 
save the race from the consequences of transgres- 
sion ? Or is the idea of checking and removing the 
consequences of violating law so alien to the whole 
system of things as to furnish an antecedent impro- 
bability that this would ever occur? Is it or is it 
not a fact that evil is arrested in our world by a 
divine arrangement that has this for its object? Is 
there what could properly be regarded as a system of 
remedies for the admitted maladies which have come 
upon the earth ? Does the idea of arresting the con- 



PKOBABILITIES OP AN ATONEMENT. 117 

sequences of violating law fall in with any of the 
analogies of nature? Or is the atonement alto- 
gether a new device in the actual government of the 
world ? 

It may be proper, therefore, to refer to some things 
in the actual administration of the world which will 
show that the idea of arresting evil by arrangements 
which contemplate that end, or which can have had 
no other design, is an idea which is actually enter- 
tained, and which will show, at the same time, that 
the anticipation of an extraordinary provision for 
that end on a larger scale is not foreign to the actual 
course of affairs, and is one which might not im- 
properly be cherished by mankind. 

I. In the first place, then, we may refer to a very 
prevalent idea in the world that such an arrange- 
ment is possible, and that it might be expected to 
occur. 

The views of the Jewish people are well known, 
and will be referred to in another part of this 
chapter. 

There is reason also to believe that an expectation 
prevailed to a very considerable extent in the pagan 
world, that something like an atonement for sin 
would be provided under the divine administration. 
The belief in the necessity of an atonement, and in 
the fact that an atonement could he made for human 
transgression, was implied in the very notion of 
bloody sacrifices. There were two classes of offer- 
ings to the gods among the heathens. One class 
was bloodless, consisting of the fruits of the earth, 
and was designed as a thank-offering, and had, of 
course, no relation to sin. It was such an offering 



118 THE ATONEMENT. 

as might be made by holy angels, or by man if be 
bad been always perfectly upright. The other 
was a bloody offering, the offering of the life of the 
animal. This could never have been designed as a 
thank-offering or as a mere expression of gratitude, 
but must have had reference to the fact that man is 
a sinner, and it must have been supposed that in 
some way it could constitute an expiation for guilt. 

In what way it was supposed that the offering of 
the life of the animal, or the life of a prisoner taken 
in war, or the life of a slave, or the life of a child, 
would make expiation for sin, — for all these were 
offered in sacrifice, — is a distinct inquiry, which 
is not necessary here to consider; but of the fact 
that such a supposition was entertained no one 
can entertain a doubt. Whether it was believed that 
such an offering made by human hands would so ap- 
pease the wrath of the gods by its being regarded as 
such an acknowledgment of the evil of sin that sin 
would be forgiven on account of it, or that the suffer- 
ing of the victim offered in sacrifice would be, in some 
way, considered as an equivalent for the punishment 
of the offender himself, may be doubtful; but the 
fact that those who offered these sacrifices did 
regard the offering as an atonement, and that 
they, therefore, believed that an atonement was 
necessary and possible, is as certain as any fact in 
history. 

And yet, while this view is fully confirmed by the 
fact of bloody offerings, there are also two other as- 
pects in which these sacrifices may be contemplated, 
bearing more directly on the point before us : — 

{a.) One is, that there is reason to suppose that the 



PROBABILITIES OP AN ATONEMENT. 119 

custom of offering sacrifice, or of making an expiation 
by the life of an animal, was originally derived from 
revelation. In itself there appears to be no reason for 
supposing that the life of an animal would be an ac- 
ceptable offering to the gods, or that it could constitute 
an expiation for sin. It would not seem probable that 
inflicting pain, or that taking away the life of an 
innocent animal, would be regarded as any reason 
why the gods should pardon a sinner and save him 
from deserved wrath, ^o such offering is made, 
or ever has been made, to a civil magistrate as a 
reason why the penalty of a law should be remitted. 
1^0 such offering is made by a child to a parent 
when his law has been violated. 'No such offering 
is made by a man to his friend whom he has 
offended, or to an enemy whose wrath he attempts 
to turn away. Confession, acknowledgment, tears, 
might be supposed to have power to influence him 
who had been offended or wronged; a bribe, it 
might be supposed, would have power to influence a 
magistrate ; but the idea would never occur that the 
offering of blood — the slaying of an animal — would 
have any effect in reference to offences of this class. 
It has, therefore, been wholly impossible, on any 
known principles of human conduct, to account for 
the resort to bloody sacrifices, as intended to appease 
the wrath of the gods ; and the most probable solu- 
tion is, that they are to be traced to an early divine 
appointment, and that they have been kept up under 
the influence of tradition, as meeting some of the 
demands of human nature when it has been impos- 
sible to trace the successive historical steps up to the 
original appointment. 



120 THE ATONEMENT. 

(6.) The other remark is, that the sacrifices offered 
by the heathen left just the impression on the minds 
of those who offered them which we must suppose 
they would do if they were originally appointed to be 
an indication to mankind that an atonement ivoidd 
be made at some future period of the world. They 
were never in themselves satisfactory. There was 
never, for example, any such feeling as the Chris- 
tian is supposed to have, and does have, when he 
contemplates the atonement made by the Redeemer, 
that a 'full, free, smd perfect oblation had been made 
for the sins of the world ;' that the sacrifice made 
was so complete that there was no necessity for its 
being repeated ; that it was of such a character that 
it could not be repeated ; that it was so perfect that 
it did not suppose or contemplate any thing future. 
The ordinary Jewish sacrifices were repeated every 
day. The high-priest went into the most holy place 
every year, on the great day of the atonement, re- 
peating what had been done the year before, as if 
there was the same need of an atonement still which 
there had been the year previous. All heathen sacri- 
fices are repeated often, as if there had been as yet 
no true expiation. The consciences of Jews and 
heathens never felt satisfied that the atonement had 
yet been offered ; and, after all that had been done 
or that could be done, there was still the feeling 
which we should suppose there would be on the 
supposition that the original intention was not that 
these sacrifices should be a proper atonement for sin, 
but that they were appointed with reference to one 
that was yet to be made. 

They thus served to keep up the impression from 



PROBABILITIES OF AN ATONEMENT. 121 

age to age that an atonement ivould be made ; and 
thus they practically directed the mind onward, and 
prepared the world to give credit to the state- 
ments about the true atonement when it should be 
offered. 

The expectation that an atonement would be made, 
thus indicated extensively in the actual belief of the 
world, must have had some ground or basis. Uni- 
versal opinions and expectations do not spring up in 
the mind of man without some foundation either in 
the nature of things, or in divine predictions, or in 
the real wants of the race ; and, in this case, such 
an expectation could have been founded only on one 
of the following things, to wit : Either, 

(1.) That the custom of sacrifice was founded on 
a tradition derived from an original divine appoint- 
ment which had a reference to an atonement to be 
made in some future period of the world. Or, 

(2.) That there was some deep conviction in 
the human mind — some profound sense of sin and 
of the justice of God — some sense of the difficulty 
of pardon without an atonement, and some belief 
that God would interfere to save the race from the 
ruin which they had brought on themselves, which 
led men to express their belief by the repetition of 
the acts of sacrifice from age to age. Or, 

(3.) That there were some observed arrangements 
for the removal of evil in the world, on a limited 
scale, which induced man to hope that there would 
be a wider and more universal arrangement for the 
removal of the great source of all evil, — sin. Thus, 
it is conceivable that there might have been such an 
observation of the methods of repairing physical 

11 



122 THE ATONEMENT. 

evils in the world, as to lead to the belief that 
the Great Ruler of the earth would not suffer far 
greater evils to triumph without some correspond- 
ing arrangement to check and remove them : some 
analogies, in the course of events, which would 
be the basis of a general expectation of an atone- 
ment. 

This leads us, then, — 

II. Secondly, to inquire what arrangements there 
are in the world for the removal of natural or phy- 
sical evils which might suggest the idea of a higher 
arrangement for the removal of moral evil, or which 
might, if the idea were once suggested, serve to keep 
up the expectation of it in the world. 

"We may refer here (1) to arrangements existing 
in the veiy constitution of things for preventing the 
consequences of our actions; and (2) to arrangements 
designed to be remedial, or introduced as indepen- 
dent contrivances on the supposition that law would 
be violated, and that have been engrafted on the 
original sj^stem of things with a view to furnish a 
remedy for such a violation. 

(1.) In regard to the first of these, I cannot better 
present the subject than in the words of Bishop Butler. 
"We may observe," says he,* "somewhat much to 
the present purpose in the constitution of nature or 
appointment of Providence ; the provision which is 
made that all the bad natural consequences of men's 
actions should not always actually follow; or that 
such bad consequences as, according to the settled 
course of things, would inevitably have followed if 

* Analogy, Part II., ch. 5, iii. 



PROBABILITIES OP AN ATONEMENT. 123 

not prevented, should in certain degrees be prevented. 
We are apt presumptuously to imagine that the 
world might have been so constituted as that there 
would not have been any such thing as misery or 
eviL On the contrary, we find the Author of nature 
permits it, but that he has provided reliefs, and in 
many cases perfect remedies, for it, after some pains 
and difficulties ; reliefs and remedies even for that 
which is the fruit of our own misconduct, and 
which, in the course of nature, would have continued 
and ended in our destruction but for such remedies. 
And this is an instance both of severity and indul- 
gence in the constitution of nature. Thus, all the 
bad consequences of a man's trifling upon a precipice 
might be prevented. And though all were not, yet 
some of them might, by proper interposition, if not 
rejected; by another's coming to the rash man's 
relief, with his own laying hold on that relief in such 
sort as the case required. Persons may do a great 
deal themselves towards preventing the bad conse- 
quences of their follies ; and more may be done by 
themselves together with the assistance of others 
their fellow-creatures ; which assistance nature re- 
quires and prompts us to. This is the general con- 
stitution of the world. N"ow, suppose it had been 
so constituted that, after such actions were done as 
were foreseen naturally to draw after them misery 
to the doer, it should have been no more in human 
power to have prevented that naturally consequent 
misery, in any instance, than it is in all : no one can 
say whether such a severe constitution of things 
might not yet have been really good. But that, on 
the contrary, provision is made by nature that we 



124 THE ATONEMENT. 

may and do to so great a degree prevent the bad 
natural effects of our follies, — this may be called 
mercy or compassion in the original constitution of 
the world; compassion as distinguished from good- 
ness in general. And, the whole human constitution 
and course of things affording us instances of such 
compassion, it would be according to the analogy 
of nature to hope that, however ruinous the natural 
consequences of vice might be, from the general 
laws of God's government over the universe, yet 
provision might be made, possibly might have been 
originally made, for preventing those ruinous conse- 
quences from inevitably following; at least, from 
following universally and in all cases." 

This extract contains the general principle in the 
remarks which I am now making. 

(2.) I refer, then, — in illustration of it, and in con- 
firmation of the view here presented, and as showing 
that men, on close observation and reflection, might 
have found such arrangements in nature for check- 
ing and removing evil as to lead to the expectation 
that there might be some higher arrangement to 
meet the calamities of the world on a wider scale, — to 
the remedial systems which are actually found in the 
world. The systems or arrangements to which I 
refer are such as presuppose that law will be vio- 
lated, and that there will be need of such an inter- 
position; or which are introduced on that suppo- 
sition and /or that end alone. In other words, they 
are such as have no other purpose to answer, and 
such as could have had no place in the system, as far 
as can now be seen, except on the supposition that there 
would he, in the course of things on the earth, evils 



PROBABILITIES OF AN ATONEMENT. 125 

to be remedied. They have no other end now ; and 
if all evil should be done away they would cease 
altogether or become useless. 

In illustrating this point, I shall not attempt to in- 
quire whether these remedial arrangements existed in 
the original constitution of things, — that is, whether 
they were introduced there on the supposition that they 
would be needed, and were so adjusted that they would 
come up of themselves when they were required, — or 
whether they were, so to speak, an after-thought, and 
were introduced to meet an actually existing evil. 
The point of the remarks which are to be made 
would not be affected whichever of these views 
should be taken ; though in a world under the go- 
vernment of a Being without change of plan or new- 
ness of purpose, it is, in fact, to be supposed that 
whatever has come up in the way of a remedy, or is 
yet to come up, is not actually an after-thought, but 
had a place in the original plan and arrangement. 
There may be an order of nature, however, in the 
arrangements which such a Being may make, though 
there may be no difference of time in the formation 
of the different parts of the plan. 

I shall refer to two classes of arrangements of the 
kind now referred to, both of a physical character, 
but making it probable that there will be found a 
system of moral remedies analogous to them. They 
are the following: — {a) Arrangements outside of the 
evil to be remedied and independent of that in 
which the evil is found, — or what is properly 
found in the materia medica of the world, or in medi- 
cine; and {h) the healing and restoring processes of 

nature, or arrangements connected loith the evil to be 

11* 



126 THE ATONEMENT. 

remedied, and which, so far as this point is con- 
cerned, are self-adjusting or self-acting, — found emi- 
nently in surgery. 

(a.) Medicine, or the arrangements in the materia 
medica of the world. 

1. All the arrangements in medicine presuppose 
that there will be violations of the laws of health, or 
that there will be evils springing from the loss of 
health to be remedied. We can conceive of a world 
where no such arrangements would exist ; and, indeed, 
we must suppose that there are no such arrange- 
ments in unfallen worlds, and will be none in hea- 
ven. We cannot suppose that in an nnfallen world 
there can be any thing which corresponds in this 
respect with the materia medica of our globe, or with 
the things that seem to have been created only on 
the supposition that there will be fevers and pleurisies 
and consumptions. But on earth the preparations 
of that kind abound everywhere. There are num- 
berless things in the mineral and vegetable worlds 
that have the properties of healing as an essential 
part of their nature, — numberless things which have, 
in fact, no other use than that which is derived from 
healing, and which seem to have been made for that 
with as distinct and original a reference as the eye 
has been for light, or food for the nourishment of 
the body. If it had not been supposed in the origi- 
nal creation that there would be diseases to be 
remedied, it is impossible to believe that these things 
would have been made with such properties as they 
now have — for it remains to be demonstrated that 
any thing was made without a distinct design ; and, 
as a general law, in finding out what purpose any 



PROBABILITIES OF AN ATONEMENT. 127 

thing is fitted to accomplish, we at the same time 
find out the purpose for which it was originally 
designed. 

2. The things which constitute the materia medica 
of the world, or which come properly under the 
name of medicine, are arranged for the purpose of 
healing. Many of these seem to have no other end, 
and no other use can be made of them. Whatever 
they have in their nature to distinguish them from 
other substances is adapted only to the purpose of 
healing ; and, though it may be true that some of 
them may have a compound adaptedness, and may 
be fitted also to subserve other ends than healing, 
yet it is also true that, so far as the medical property 
in any of these is concerned, and, in many cases, so 
far as any distinguishing property is concerned, that 
property pertains only to the healing of diseases, and 
can be applied to no other use. Mercury or quick- 
silver, for example, has, indeed, a compound adapted- 
ness, — for it may be used in the arts as well as in 
medicine ; but this is not true of numberless other 
things used in the healing art. Senna, rhubarb, 
Peruvian bark, and numerous other similar things 
have no other use than healing and can be converted 
to no other purpose. They cannot be placed on the 
same level or made to subserve the same ends as 
rice, maize, wheat, lentils ; for they have properties dis- 
tinct from them, and they cannot be made to subserve 
the ends which those things are designed to secure. 
A druggist would starve to death in his shop, though 
there might be medicines enough there to heal all 
the diseases in the world. A company of men on a 
barren island would soon die if there should be no- 



128 THE ATONEMENT. 

thing else sent to them than a cargo of medicines ; 
they would die if their island produced nothing but 
quicksilver, rhubarb, and Peruvian bark. The fair 
conclusion from this fact is, that these things were 
designed for the purpose of healing ; that is, that it 
was contemplated that there would be diseases de- 
manding a remedy. 

3. These remedies lie outside of the evil to be 
remedied. They dijffer from the arrangement which 
will be noticed next in order (h) in the fact that they 
are no part of the original organization of that which 
it was contemplated would need a remedy. It is an 
independent arrangement, — a separate system, — 
which could not be itself originated by the disease 
to be cured ; for, whatever may be said about the 
adaptedness of a broken bone to heal itself, it cannot 
be said that intermittent or bilious fevers have any 
tendency to produce the tree on which the bark that 
is adapted to heal those diseases is found. They 
constitute an independent arrangement by them- 
selves, and would have an existence — though, as far 
as appears, a useless existence — even if there were no 
fevers to be cured. 

4. In a great measure these remedies are effectual. 
It is true that all diseases are not healed, and that 
there are diseases which ultimately baffle the skill of 
medicine. It is true, also, that there are diseases for 
which as yet no specific remedy has been found. 
But it is also true that it may ultimately be ascer- 
tained that there is no form of disease to which the 
human frame is subject for which a remedy has not 
been provided, — a remedy which might either weaken 
the force of the disease or wholly remove it. The 



PROBABILITIES OF AN ATONEMENT. 129 

remedies for disease are sometimes undiscovered for 
ages, and, though existing, they are useless, — as the 
tree producing the Peruvian bark continued to grow 
from age to age wholly useless to the world until a 
happy discovery disclosed its value to mankind. In 
like manner, it may be possible that arrangements 
exist for healing all the diseases to which the human 
frame is subject, and that happy discoveries may yet 
so greatly enlarge the knowledge of these remedies 
as greatly to alleviate all the maladies to which the 
race is subject, and perhaps to remove many of them 
altogether. 

5. This arrangement in regard to physical mala- 
dies might suggest the possibility, and perhaps the 
probability, that some correspondent arrangement 
would be made to meet the moral evils of the world 
and to check the progress of those evils. It is cer- 
tainly a very curious fact in itself that an arrange- 
ment of the kind just referred to should be found in 
the world; that it should be contemplated, ap- 
parently, in the original structure of things, that there 
would be disease, and that there should be found a 
separate and wholly independent arrangement for 
checking, relieving, and removing it. It is an ar- 
rangement which could not have been anticipated ; 
for if we should conceive it to be possible that we 
could have been consulted beforehand on that point, 
we should have said that it would be wholly impos- 
sible that such an arrangement could be found. We 
should have said at once that the presumption would 
be that evil would be prevented altogether; that 
disease would not be suffered to come into the sys- 
tem ; that it seems to be so clumsy a device that we 
I 



130 THE ATONEMENT. 

canDot suppose that a perfectly wise being would 
have adopted it ; that no wise man would originate 
such a system ; that it is difficult to reconcile the 
idea of permitting pleurisies and consumptions to 
come upon men with any proper notions of benevo- 
lence, whatever may be said of the benevolence of 
the remedy; that the whole scheme is similar to 
what would occur in the construction of a machine 
if the inventor should purposely make it so that it 
would get out of order with a view to show his skill 
by an independent arrangement in repairing the 
irregularity and in restoring its regular motions. It 
must be conceded that we cannot explain the reason 
why this apparently strange procedure has been suf- 
fered to occur, and we may admit that as yet we 
are not able to see that it is the most benevolent 
arrangement that could have been adopted. But still, 
the fact remains as a part of a great system found 
everywhere in nature, and, whatever may have been 
the reason of it, it is there. Whether the explana- 
tion is to be found in the fact that the human frame 
could not have been so made as not to be liable 
to decay and disease ; or whether, on the whole, 
higher benevolence is evinced by allowing disease 
to come in, and showing the high skill evinced 
as an independent arrangement in the provision 
for healing disease ; or whether the whole arrange- 
ment is one that lies beyond our power of com- 
prehension, having some ends to accomplish which 
we cannot as yet understand, yet the arrangement 
exists. It pervades the world. It is a part of 
the system. We see nothing on earth that is exempt 
from it ; and this might lead men to suppose that it 



PROBABILITIES OF AN ATONEMENT. 131 

would be found to be a universal arrangement, and 
would be as applicable to moral as to physical mala- 
dies ; that is, that there would be found somewhere, 
to be disclosed in its own time, some independent 
arrangement for checking or removing the moral 
maladies — the sins — of the world. An atonement, if 
it answered this end, would obviously fall in with 
this anticipation, and would be in accordance with 
the general system which has allowed disease to 
come into the world, and which, by a separate and 
independent arrangement, has sought to check and 
remove it. 

(6.) Healing Processes. — I refer not here, as in the 
former specification, to arrangements outside of that 
which is to be remedied, or to arrangements that 
seem to constitute a separate and independent sys- 
tem capable of being applied to that which is to be 
healed, but to arrangements in the thing itself^ — in its 
very structure and constitution. These are, indeed, 
in one respect independent arrangements ; for we may 
easily suppose that bones might have been so made 
that they would be liable to be broken though no ar- 
rangement existed for their knitting together again, 
or that a tree might be liable to have its bark injured 
though there were no arrangement for repairing and 
restoring it. There seems to be nothing in the nature 
of a bone that would dispose its parts necessarily to 
come together again if it should be broken ; and in 
this respect the arrangement for healing seems to be 
quite independent of the purpose of making a bone. 
In like manner, we can easily imagine that all trees 
might have been so made that when the bark was in- 
jured there would be no arrangement for the forma- 



132 THE ATONEMENT. 

tion of new bark, or that all arteries and veins might 
have been so made that when tied there would be no 
tendency in the blood to form for itself a new chan- 
nel. The arrangement for restoring the part is, in 
some respects, quite as much a separate system as 
that of creating Peruvian bark for a specific disease, 
and the fact that the arrangement could be incorpo- 
rated into the thing itself as a part of the original 
plan rather increases our admiration of the wisdom 
and skill evinced, — as if the spring of a watch were 
so made that there should be a tendency in it to 
unite again if it should be broken, or as if the wheels 
of a locomotive were so made that if they were frac- 
tured there should be an inwrought tendency to 
repair themselves. It is evidently, however, a part 
of the same general system, showing that it was 
contemplated that there would be fractures to be 
repaired. The two cases agree in the principle that 
there would be occasion for some arrangement to 
meet and repair an anticipated evil ; they differ in 
the fact that in the one case the arrangement is 
outside and independent ; in the other it is incorpo- 
rated with the thing itself, A self-repairing spring to 
a watch would illustrate the aspect of the subject 
now to be considered; the act of a watchmaker re- 
pairing a watch — an outside arrangement — would 
illustrate the point before considered. 

It may be proper now to refer to a few cases 
where the arrangement under consideration is 
found, or where an arrangement for healing is incor- 
porated in the thing itself. 

(1.) The case of a tree will furnish one illustration. 
It is the arrangement for replacing the bark when in- 



PROBABILITIES OF AN ATONEMENT. 133 

jured, or for sending out new shoots when its branches 
are cut o& A tree might have been so made that 
neither of these things would ever occur ; so made 
that an injury once inflicted would be final. But 
this is not the plan which has been adopted. The 
bark, when injured, — unless the injury has gone 
so far as to cut oft' the ascent of the sap altogether, — 
will restore itself, ^ew bark will begin at once to 
form, the wound will be covered up, the vitality and 
the strength of the tree will be preserved. ISTotwith- 
standing the wound, it may produce as large a luxu- 
riance of foliage, and bear as large an amount of 
fruit, and live as many years, as though no wound 
had been inflicted on it. This is an arrangement in 
itself quite as independent as the creation of medi- 
cine to cure diseases ; but it has this peculiarity, that, 
instead of being outside, it is incorporated into the 
very nature of the tree, or is self-acting. So there 
exists a similar arrangement for throwing out new 
shoots and limbs when the first growth shall be 
pruned away. To a certain extent this is found, 
probably, in all trees; and the provision in the case is 
invaluable for the purpose of training the tree to a 
desired form, and even for producing fruit. The 
arrangement is not, indeed, that the same limb will 
shoot out again; but it is that others will be formed 
which will answer the same or a better purpose ; 
which will grow up more densety or more sparsely ; 
which will come out in more desirable places; or 
which will supply the place of those that are decayed 
and dying. This arrangement, we may suppose, 
might have been found in restoring the wings of a 
bird or the limbs of a horse or a man, and there 

12 



134 THE ATONEMENT. 

seems to have been no reason in the nature of things 
why it should not have been incorporated into the 
structure of all animals, for something like this is 
found in some of the lower species of animals, and, 
so far as we can see, it seems to have been a mere 
purpose of will, though founded, doubtless, on some 
good reason why it should not have been extended 
through all departments of the animal kingdom. 

(2.) We may refer to the arrangement for the re- 
union of a bone when broken. There was nothing 
in the nature of the case which made it necessary 
that the fragments of a bone when broken should 
have a tendency to reunite. A bone would have 
been complete if this tendency had not existed. 
We can easily conceive of a bone as having no such 
property; and it is clear that the arrangement might 
have been such as to show that it was never contem- 
plated that a bone would be broken, or, if broken, 
that it should forever remain so. The provision 
for its 'knitting' or uniting is quite a distinct and 
independent matter, — as much so as the creation of 
bark to be given in a fever. 

It is, too, among the most delicate of all the 
arrangements in the human system, involving sepa- 
rate and peculiar forms of process for the formation 
of new bone in a manner quite distinct from that in 
which the bones are originally formed and are made 
to increase ; a method of secreting bony matter, and 
of conveying it to the broken part, and of depositing 
it there, which is in no wise necessary in the idea 
of the formation of bone. All this shows that it was 
contemplated in the original creation that a bone 
might be broken, and it might, at least, suggest 



PROBABILITIES OF AN ATONEMENT. 135 

the inquiry whether an arrangement may not exist 
for repairing moral evils.* 

(3.) As a third illustration of the general principle, 
we may refer to the case of a broken bone where it 
would be difficult or impracticable to form bone so 
that the broken parts could be reunited, and where 
the obj ect is accomplished by the formation of cartilage. 
Such a case occurs when the knee-pan is broken. 
The knee-pan is, as Dr. Paley observes, a remarkable 
part of the human frame, that seems to have been 
added to the original conception. "It appears," says 
he, " to be supplemental, as it were, to the frame ; 
added, as it should almost seem, afterward; not 
quite necessary, but very convenient. It is separate 
from the other bones ; that is, it is not connected 
with any other bones by the common mode of union. 
It is soft, or hardly formed, in infancy, and produced 
by an ossification, of the inception or progress of 
which no account can be given from the structure or 
exercise of the part."t The knee-pan, though not 
so liable to fracture as many other of the bones of 
the human frame, may be broken. And yet it is not 
easy so to lay it down, so to bandage it, so to con- 
fine it, so to compress it together, as to secure a re- 
union of the broken parts : perhaps, detached as it 
is from the other bones, it would not be easy to 
secure the secretions necessary for its 'knitting' 
consistently with the present arrangement. Pos- 
sibly, too, if this could be done, it could not be so 
confined and bandaged as to secure a reunion of 



* See Paget' s Surgical Pathology, pp. 160-174. 
f Natural Theology, chap. 8, v. 



136 THE ATONEMENT. 

hone without iDJiiry to the delicate mechanism of the 
knee itself. However this may be, it does not re- 
unite as the other bones do. But the evil is not left 
without any remedy. Though the broken fragments 
of the hones will not unite, yet a cartilage may be 
formed between them, which will restore the injured 
bone to a useful function. This is according]}^ 
done. The case is one that shows that there is a 
pervading law in the system of things by which a 
remedy for evils that occur is provided, and it may 
suggest the probability that somewhere there will 
be found an arrangement to meet the higher evils 
that may come into the system. 

(4.) A similar arrangement occurs in regard to the 
arteries and veins. It was possible, evidently, so to 
make the human frame that there would never have 
been an opportunity for the performance of a surgical 
operation ; that is, so to make it that, on the suppo- 
sition that an amputation was to be performed, the 
patient would bleed to death. But, as the results 
have shown, it was very important that the frame 
should be constructed on the supposition that ampu- 
tation might become necessary. And it was equally 
important, if this should be done, that provision 
should be made for carrying the blood around the 
system in some regular mode of circulation, or that 
its natural flow should not be permanently stopped : 
in other words, that it should be practicable not only 
to tie an artery and to prevent bleeding, but that 
the blood should continue to flow through the artery 
thus arrested, and be conveyed around again to the 
lungs and the heart. But this was a delicate, and 
apparently an impossible, arrangement. Yet it has 



PROBABILITIES OF AN ATONEMENT. 137 

been accomplished. By one of the most wonderful 
contrivances in the human frame, the blood ploughs 
out for itself a new channel, and thus secures a 
free circulation. It is not like water that is ob- 
structed, and that makes a way for itself over or 
through the embankment by mere mechanical force : 
it is as if in a system of water-pipes laid under 
ground there was a self-acting power in the water, 
by which, if one of the pipes should be injured or 
cut off, it should plough out a channel in the ground 
for a pipe, and construct a new pipe, connecting it care- 
fully with the obstructed part, and so laying it down as 
to connect itself again with the main pipe, and secur- 
ing — though by a slightly circuitous course — the regu- 
lar flow of the water. Obviously, there is no human 
mechanism that can accomplish this ; but it is accom- 
plished in the human frame, and is one of those won- 
derful provisions in nature which indicate the existence 
of remedial systems, and which naturally suggest the 
inquiry whether some plan may not have been con- 
templated which would be fitted to remove all the 
evils, physical and moral, which would be likely to 
come into and disturb the general system. 

The process to which I have here referred, by 
which the blood in the case of amputation forms 
for itself a new channel and secures the proper cir- 
culation, is so interesting, and is such a beautiful 
exhibition of the Divine wisdom and goodness, that 
I cannot better illustrate my subject than by copying 
the description of the process from a well-known 
book on surgery : — 

" The method may be termed an outgrowth from 
the vessels already formed. Suppose a line or arch 

12* 



138 



THE ATONEMENT. 



of capillary vessels passing below the edge or surface 
of a part to which new material has been superadded 
[as in the annexed figure]. The vessel will first 




present a dilatation at one point, and coincidently, 
or shortly after, at another, as if its wall yielded a 
little near the edge or surface. The slight pouches 
thus formed gradually extend, as blind canals or 
diverticula, from the original vessel, still directing 
their course towards the edge or surface of the new 
material, and crowded with blood-corpuscles, which 
are pushed into them from the main stream. Still 
extending, they converge, they meet ; the partition- 
wall that is at first formed by the meeting ends, 
clears away, and a perfect arched tube is formed, 
through which the blood, diverging from the main 
or former stream and then rejoining it, may be con- 
tinually propelled. 

"In this way, then, are the simplest blood-vessels 
of granulations and the like outgrowths formed. 
The plan on which they are arranged is made more 
complex by the similar outgrowths of branches from 
adjacent arches, and their mutual anastomoses ; 
but, to all appearance, the whole process is one of 



PROBABILITIES OF AN ATONEMENT. 139 

outgrowth and development from vessels already 
formed. And I beg of you to consider the wonder 
of such a process : how, in a day, a hundred or more 
of such loops of fine membranous tube, less than 
one-thousandth of an inch in diameter, can be 
upraised, — not by any mere force of pressure, though 
with all the regularity of the simplest mechanism, 
but each by a living growth and development as 
orderly and exact as that which we might trace in 
the part most essential to the continuance of life. 
Observe that no force so simple as that of mere 
extension or assimilation can determine such a result 
as this ; for to achieve the construction of such an 
arch it must spring with due adjustment from two 
determined points, and then its flanks must be com- 
mensurately raised, and these, as with mutual attrac- 
tion, must approach and meet exactly in the crown. 
Nothing could accomplish such a result but force 
determining the concurrent development of the two 
outgrowing vessels. We admire the intellect of the 
engineer who, after years of laborious thought, with 
all the appliances of weight and measure and appro- 
priate material, can begin, at points wide apart, and 
force through the solid masses of the earth, a tunnel, 
and can wall it in secure from external violence and 
strong to bear some ponderous traffic ; and yet he 
does but grossly and imperfectly imitate the Divine 
work of living mechanism that is hourly accomplished 
in the bodies of the least conspicuous objects of 
creation, — nay, even in the healing of our casual 
wounds and sores."* 

* Paget's Surgical Pathology, pp. 146, 147. 



140 THE ATONEMENT. 

In connection with these cases, the following gene- 
ral remarks may be made, as bearing on the subject 
before us : — 

(a.) They all proceed on the supposition that there 
might be violations of law, or that injuries might 
occur, which it would be desirable to repair. Whe- 
ther such violations of law would in fact exist, might 
be another question ; but it is clear that in the origi- 
nal arrangement it was contemplated that they 
might, and that some remedial arrangement would 
be desirable. 

(b.) They are remedial in their design. They have 
no other object. Whether independent arrange- 
ments, as in materia medica, or whether inwrought in 
the constitution of things, they are designed for 
this end alone, and are, in either case, so far an 
independent arrangement that they are in no way 
necessary to the original existence of that to which 
they are adapted, or to its perfect action, if no vio- 
lation of law were to occur. 

(c.) They naturally suggest the idea of repairing 
moral evils. They bring the question to the mind 
whether it is not probable that the Author of all 
things, having made such arrangements for repairing 
the injuries resulting from a violation of the laws of 
health, — an injured tree, or a broken bone, — would 
not also make provision for repairing the higher 
evils that might disturb the moral system. This 
inquiry has increased force in proportion to the 
greatness of the evils to be repaired, and to the diffi- 
culty of such a higher adjustment; for, from all that 
we know of the displays of Divine wisdom in creation 
and providence, does not the fact that it is difficult 



PROBABILITIES OF AN ATONEMENT. 141 

render it more probable that such an arrangement 
will be made, since it will furnish a suitable oc- 
casion for the displa}^ of such wisdom? In other 
words, is it probable that an arrangement would be 
made involving so much care and skill for allaying 
a fever or healing a wound in a tree, or in mending 
a broken bone, and none be made to save the soul ? 

The following remarks may, without impropriety, 
be introduced here as showing how the arrangements 
for the repairs of injuries in the human frame natu- 
rally suggest the question about a higher remedy to 
meet the evils of sin in the soul of man. They have 
the more value as a part of my argument from the 
fact that they are the remarks of a surgeon, not of a 
professed theologian : — 

"If I may venture on so high a theme, let me 
suggest that the instances of recovery from disease 
and injury seem to be only examples of a law yet 
larger than that within the terms of which they may 
be comprised ; a law wider than the grasp of science ; 
the law that expresses our Creator's will for the re- 
covery of all lost perfection. To this train of thought 
we are guided by the remembrance that the healing 
of the body was ever chosen as the fittest emblem 
of His work whose true mission was to raise man's 
fallen spirit and repair the injuries it had sustained; 
and that once, the healing power was exerted in a 
manner purposely so confined as to advance, like that 
which we can trace, hj progressive stages to the 
complete cure. For there was one upon whom, 
when the light of heaven first fell, so imperfect was 
his vision that he saw, confusedly, ^men, as trees, 
walking,' and then, by a second touch of the Divine 



142 THE ATONEMENT. 

Hand, was 'restored, and saw every man clearly.' 
Thus, guided by the brighter light of revelation, it 
may be our privilege, while we study the science 
of our healing art, to gain, by the illustrations 
of analogy, a clearer insight into the oneness of 
the plan by which things spiritual and corporeal are 
directed. Even now we may trace some analogy 
between the acts of the body and those of man's 
intellectual and moral nature. As in the develop- 
ment of the germ, so in the history of the human 
spirit, we may discern a striving after perfection; 
after a perfection not viewed in any present model, 
(for the human model was marred almost as soon as 
it was formed,) but manifested to the enlightened 
Reason in the 'Express Image' of the 'Father of 
Spirits.' And so, whenever, through human frailty, 
amid the violences of the world and the remaining 
' infection of our nature,' the spirit loses aught of 
the perfection to which it was once admitted, still, 
its implanted power is ever urgent to repair the loss. 
The same power, derived and still renewed from the 
same Parent, working by the same appointed means 
and to the same end, restores the fallen spirit to 
nearly the same perfection that it had before. Then, 
not unscarred, yet living, — 'fractus sed invictus,' — 
the spirit yet feels its capacity for a higher life, and 
passes to its immortal destiny. In that destiny the 
analogy ends. We may watch the body developing 
into all its marvellous perfection and marvellous fit- 
ness for the purpose of its existence in the world ; 
but, this purpose accomplished, it passes its meri- 
dian, and then we trace it through the gradual 
decays of life and death. But for the human spirit 



PROBABILITIES OF AN ATONEMENT. 143 

that has passed the ordeal of this world there is no 
such end. Emerging from its imprisonment in the 
body, it soars to the element of its higher life : there, 
in perpetual youth, its powers expand as the vision 
of the Infinite unfolds before it; there, in the very 
presence of its Model, its Parent, and the Spring of 
all its power, it is ' like him, for it sees him as he 

IS. * 

III. In illustration of the idea that it is probable 
that there would be a Divine interposition in behalf 
of men for removing the evils that had come into 
the world, and as perhaps at the same time sug- 
gesting the kind of interposition which might be 
anticipated, we may refer to the fact that we are 
often preserved from evils to which we are exposed, 
by the personal sacrifices of others. 

Facts of this kind are so numerous that it is un- 
necessary to attempt to specify them. The arrange- 
ments of society seem constituted much on this 
principle, that sacrifices are to be made by one por- 
tion to ward off impending evils from another, or to 
procure those blessings which are to be transmitted 
to other generations. If we look at our enjoyments 
we shall perhaps be surprised to find how few of 
them have been obtained directly by our own exer- 
tions, and equally surprised to find to how great an 
extent we are indebted for them to the sacrifices 
which others have made. I allude to those sacrifices 
of time, comfort, property, which are made by men 
not altogether, if they are mainly, for themselves, 
and to those which, in numerous cases, are made in 

* Paget' s Surgical Pathology, p. 117. 



144 THE ATONEMENT. 

a great measure, if not entirely, for otbers. We are 
saved in infancy and childhood from cold, starva- 
tion, and nakedness because there are those who 
are willing to toil for us and to deny themselves of 
ease and comfort that we may be happy. We are 
saved from oppression and slavery because others 
have been willing to peril their lives in the cause of 
freedom. Others minister to us in sickness by much 
personal sacrifice, and in numerous cases we are 
preserved from death because they are willing to 
forego ease and comfort in our behalf. The blessings 
of religion have come to us because, in troublous 
times, there have been those who were willing to 
practise self-denial, to forego ease and comfort, to 
face the terrors of persecution, to give themselves to 
death, that they might make the gospel known to a 
perishing world. 

A history of the sacrifices and self-denials of the 
men who have devoted themselves to the cause of 
patriotism, humanity, and religion would constitute 
a very considerable part of the history of the world. 
The most interesting chapters of that history are 
those which record the deeds of such men as How- 
ard ; the facts that most relieve the pained eye in 
contemplating the general selfishness of the race are 
the acts of generous self-denial and sacrifice which 
have occurred. A few of these things have been 
recorded, — though but few ; for men have been much 
more disposed to rear monuments to perpetuate the 
fame of the desolators of the world than of its bene- 
factors, and not a few of these generous deeds have 
occurred in such humble life that they are unnoticed 
by the historian. Yet they do occur. They are 



PROBABILITIES OF AN ATONEMENT. 145 

found in every sick-room, in every hospital, in every 
prison, almost in every family; in every case where 
life is perilled to save men from flame and flood ; in 
the self-denials of every missionary of the cross who 
forsakes the comforts of a civilized land to go among 
wretched savages, that he may raise them to the 
dignity and purity of civilized life and make known 
to them the method hy which sinners are saved. 
Evil would long since have had the entire ascend- 
ency in our world if it had not been for such gene- 
rous self-sacrifice; and the fact that, with all the 
depravity of the world, such deeds of self-denial, if 
collected and recorded, would constitute so material 
a part of the history of our race, shows that it may 
be a general principle in the Divine administration 
that evil shall be removed by sacrifices endured in 
behalf of the wretched and the guilty. 

That this may be a general principle, and that these 
facts should be allowed to suggest the idea that 
there may be a higher intervention of this sort than 
those which ordinarily pass under the observation 
of mankind, may be made to appear more probable 
from the following considerations : — 

(a.) There is a fitness for such interventions in the 
actual condition of things. There is guilt, there is 
temptation, there is danger, which seem adapted — if 
not designed — to suggest the idea of such interven- 
tions, and to lay the foundation for them. Facts in 
these respects are such as they would be on the sup- 
position that it was contemplated that there would 
be occasion for the intervention of self-sacrifice and 
self-denial. 

(b.) Such intervention by self-sacrifice and self- 

K 13 



146 THE ATONEMENT. 

denial is made necessary if these evils are to be re- 
moved. There is no other method by which this 
can be done; and they would not be removed if 
there were no such interventions. Sickness would 
terminate in death ; nations would be enslaved ; the 
blind, the dumb, the insane, would perish ; the hea- 
then would sink to ruin ; the world would be ignorant, 
degraded, lost, if it were not for such acts of gene- 
rous self-sacrifice in the behalf of others. Liberty, 
intelligence, civilization, and the ordinary comforts 
of life, are the fruits of such deeds of self-denial in 
behalf of others ; and even now the civilized portions 
of the earth would sink again to barbarism, de- 
gradation, and wretchedness if the spirit which 
prompted to such acts were not continued in the 
world. 

(c.) Such intervention answers the end contem- 
plated. The evil is removed. It is impossible, in- 
deed, now to ascertain what the condition of the 
world would have been if there had been no such 
self-sacrifice in the cause of liberty and human 
rights, of the oppressed and the down-trodden, of 
the suffering and the sad. Long before this, so far as 
appears, the liberties of the world might have been 
trampled out effectually and forever, and the earth 
might have been wholly under the sway of oppres- 
sion or made desolate by war; just as, in a some- 
what parallel case, the world would have been 
wholly overrun by wild beasts, reptiles, and mon- 
sters if there had been no resistance on the part of 
man, nothing done to check their growth and 
triumph. 

{d.) This arrangement brings into exercise, if not 



PROBABILITIES OP AN ATONEMENT. 147 

into existence itself, a higher virtue than could 
otherwise have been developed, if it would have 
existed at all. It is undeniable that some of the 
loftiest virtues exhibited on the earth are those 
which are manifested in the benevolence shown to 
the suffering; in attendance on the sick; in the 
defence of the rights of man ; in the establishment 
of liberty ; in founding and sustaining hospitals and 
asylums for the insane, the deaf, the blind. Many 
of the very highest virtues ever exhibited on earth 
have been developed, if not absolutely created, in 
this manner. And they are mere virtues. They 
are acts of pure benevolence. What is done would 
not have been necessary if there had been no evil to 
be repaired, no suffering to be alleviated, no wrong 
to be redressed, no sin to be checked or forgiven. 
These virtues might have existed, indeed, in the 
germ, — as all these virtues may be supposed thus to 
exist in a perfectly holy being — but they could not 
have been developed ; and it is not easy to see how, 
except to an omniscient being, their existence could 
have been known. Under the existing arrangement, 
however, the virtues thus created or developed may 
be regarded as absolute gain in the moral system ; 
that is, there is just so much more in the system to be 
seen and admired, to contribute to the honour of 
the individual or the good of the whole, and to dis- 
play the character of God. "We cannot, indeed, sup- 
pose a watch to he mode to go wrong in order to show 
the skill of the watchmaker in correcting the evil ; 
or a tree to he so made that it ivould be injured in order 
to show the wisdom of the Creator in arranging a 
healing process ; or a limb to he so made that it ivould 



148 THE ATONEMENT. 

he broken in order to show the art and benevolence 
of surgery in the process of healing ; or man made 
to he a sufferer in order to develop the virtues of 
benevolence in attending on the sick and in found- 
ing hospitals ; but, on the supposition that a watch 
does go wrong, or that a tree is injured, or that a 
bone is broken, or that man is a sufferer, w^e can see 
how the wisdom and benevolence evinced in repair- 
ing the evil become the occasion of originating or 
developing a new and peculiar order of virtues in 
the world, and thus the source of a positive gain in 
the cause of virtue. The result may be set down as 
something absolutely gained in the great system of 
things on the earth ; something which but for this 
could not have been known. 

May it not be possible that these principles may 
have a more general prevalence in the universe, 
and influence the minds of the dwellers in other 
worlds? Is it unreasonable to suppose that what 
we regard as so great a virtue on earth may be 
found to exist among heavenly beings ? And as 
among those beings there can be no suffering to 
relieve, no sick-beds to visit, none who are oppressed 
and down-trodden that need the interposition of 
others to deliver them, none who are insane, deaf, 
blind, needing the sympathy and care of others, may 
we not regard it as probable — or, at least, as not im- 
probable — that the sympathy of those beings may 
find an opportunity for developing itself by comiug 
to the aid of those of an humbler order — the dwellers 
on earth — who do need such sympathy ? May we 
not, therefore, suppose that angelic beings might 
stoop to self-denial and self-sacrifice in behalf of 



PROBABILITIES OF AN ATONEMENT. 149 

man ? Would it be a departure from this great 
principle if the feeling of sympathy should be found 
in a still higher form in the bosom of one related to 
the Eternal Father as the Son of God is represented 
to be, and that he should be willing to come to the 
earth to illustrate the principle on the highest scale 
possible by making an atonement for the sins of the 
world ? 

rV". In illustration of the same point, we may refer 
to the fact that there have been expectations widely 
cherished that an atonement would be made for sin ; 
expectations foundedon what were regarded as Divine 
predictions. At this stage of the argument it would 
not be logical to assume that the predictions in the 
Old Testament are really of Divine origin ; nor, in the 
view in which I propose to consider them, would it 
be necessary to assume that they had such an origin ; 
but they may be referred to as showing what, for 
some reasons, however it may be explained, have 
been the anticipation, in the mind of man on the 
subject. We may, therefore, in this view of the 
case, and at this point in the argument, look at the 
Hebrew prophets, not as acknowledged prophets, 
but as men giving utterance to an expectation, laid 
somehow in the nature of man, that there would he 
in future times such an interposition in behalf of 
our world as would be implied in the work of the 
atonement. 

The fact here referred to is this: That there 
existed from time to time in Judea a remarkable 
class or succession of men, known by the appellation 
of ^prophets,' who undoubtedly entertained the be- 
lief that an atonement for sin would be made at 

13* 



150 THE ATONEMENT. 

some future time, and who proclaimed this, as the 
foundation of an extensive national hope and belief. 
The peculiarity in the case was, that it was not a 
single man who did this under the influence of high 
poetic feeling, as Virgil may have done,* but that 
these men appeared sometimes in groups and some- 
times in succession ; that their appearing was not 
the result of any system of education and was not 
regulated in any precise order ; that they did not 
always, or even commonly, spring out of the esta- 
blished order of the priesthood; that they had as 
prophets nothing to do in offering the sacrifices 
which typified an atonement ; that they were of dif- 
ferent ranks of society, now springing up in the 
lowest grades of social life and employment, and 
now in the most elevated; that their predictions 
were sometimes in prose and sometimes in song; 
that they were all men of eminent moral worth, — 
men who gave evidence that they walked with 
God, — men who, from some cause, had an insight 
into the Divine purposes and counsels which was 
not vouchsafed to the community at large. Be- 
sides these traits which characterized them as an 
order of men, there are three other things to be 
noticed as bearing on the point before us. (a.) The 
first is, that they all claimed to have been sent from 
God, and to speak in the name of God. {b.) The 
second is, that they founded their predictions on 
that fact, and never assumed that they were the 
utterances of their own genius, (c.) The third 
thing is, that these utterances were undoubtedly 

* In the Pollio. 



PROBABILITIES OF AN ATONEMENT. 151 

made before the appearing of Jesus of ITazareth on 
the earth, and, consequently, before any claim was 
set up by his followers that he had died to make an 
expiation for the sins of men. 

The burden of their message, as I shall now show, 
was, that there would be in some future time a 
deliverer from sin ; that one would come who would 
be a voluntary sacrifice for the transgressions of the 
world ; that by the sacrifice which he would make 
he would supersede all the sacrifices which were 
then appointed to be made ; that he would intro- 
duce a new economy, under which men would be 
pardoned, purified, and saved ; that by his sub- 
stituted sufiferings, his sorrows and his death, the 
malady of sin would be healed. 

The predictions on this subject may be arranged 
in two classes : such as express an anticipation in 
general that a remarkable personage or deliverer 
would come ; and such as describe his work as 
making a sacrifice or expiation for sin. 

Of the former class are such statements as the 
following. "The sceptre shall not depart from 
Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until 
Shiloh come ; and unto him shall the gathering of 
the people be." (Gen. xlix. 10.) " And the Eedeemer 
shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from 
transgression in Jacob, saith the Lord." (Isa. lix. 20.) 
" And I will shake all nations, and the desire of all 
nations shall come." (Haggai ii. 7.) "Behold, I 
will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the 
way before me ; and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall 
suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of 
the covenant, whom ye delight in : behold, he shall 



152 THE ATONEMENT. 

come, saith the Lord of hosts." (Mai. iii. 1.) "And 
there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, 
and a branch shall grow out of his roots ; and the 
Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the spirit of 
wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and 
might, the spirit of knowledge and the fear of the 
Lord." (Isa. xi. 2.) " Seventy weeks are determined 
upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish 
the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to 
make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in 
everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision 
and prophecy, and to anoint the Most Holy. Know, 
therefore, and understand, that from the going 
forth of the commandment to restore and to build 
Jerusalem, unto the Messiah the Prince, shall be seventy 
weeks, and threescore and two weeks." Dan. ix. 
24, 25. 

These passages illustrate the undoubted fact that 
among the Hebrew people there was a class of men, 
claiming to be sent from God, who announced that 
a remarkable personage would appear in some 
future time, under the general character of a de- 
liverer; and they furnish at the same time a reason 
for what is as undoubted a fact that this expectation 
obtained a general prevalence among their country- 
men. 

The other class of passages pertains more de- 
finitely to the point now before us. They are such 
as served to excite the expectation that that personage 
would be a sufferer; that his life would be cut off 
by violence and injustice ; and that somehow by his 
sufferings and death he would lay the foundation for 
the pardon of sin. 



PROBABILITIES OF AN ATONEMENT. 153 

The passages now referred to are such as the fol- 
lowing: — "And after threescore and two weeks 
shall Messiah he cut off, but not for himself." (Dan. 
ix. 26.) "In the midst of the week he shall cause the 
sacrifice and the oblation to cease." (Dan. ix. 27.) 
"Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people, 
and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and 
to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for 
iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness.'" 
(Dan. ix. 24.)* "And in this mountain [in Jerusa- 
lem] shall the Lord of hosts make unto all people a 
feast of fat things, a feast of wines on the lees, of 
fat things full of marrow, of wines on the lees well 
refined. And in this mountain he will destroy the 
face of the covering cast over all people, and the 
veil that is spread over all nations. He will swal- 
low up death in victory; and the Lord God will 
wipe away tears from off all faces." (Isa. xxv. 6, 7, 8.) 
" He [the Messiah] is despised and rejected of men ; 
a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief." " He 
hath borne our griefs and carried our sorrows." 
"He was wounded for our transgressions, he was 
bruised for our iniquities." "The chastisement of 
our peace," that is, the chastisement by which our 
peace is effected, "was upon him." "With his 
stripes we are healed." " The Lord hath laid on 
him the iniquity of us all." "He was cut off out 
of the land of the living." "For the transgression 
of my people was he stricken." "When thou shalt 



* For an illustration of these passages, and for proof that they refer 
to the Messiah and to his death as an atoning sacrifice for sin, I 
may be permitted to refer to my Notes on Daniel in loc. 



154 THE ATONEMENT. 

make his soul an offering for sin." "He shall see 
of the travail of his soul, and shall justify many, 
for he shall bear their iniquities." '' He bare the 
sin of many." Isa. liii. 3-11.* 

In reference to these texts of Scripture as bearing 
on the point before us, two remarks may be made : — 

(a.) If they are admitted to be a Divine communi- 
cation, they settle the point that there was a well- 
founded presumption that an arrangement would 
be made for an atonement. They show that the 
prevailing expectation that an atonement would be 
made was more than a presumption founded on the 
analogies of nature. They explain how the antici- 
pation sprung up in the human mind, and they 
justify all the expectations of an atonement that 
were ever cherished in the world. They serve, too, 
to explain how it was that sacrifices considered as 
types were kept up so long and with so much 
interest in Judea, and how the Hebrew people were 
cheered with the hope that a period would arrive 
when the necessity of sacrifices would cease and 
their painful and expensive offerings would come 
to an end. 

(6.) If they are not regarded as a Divine communi- 
cation, then the fact that they were uttered must be 
explained in some other way. That such utter- 
ances were made, and that they became a perma- 
nent record, stimulating the hopes of men and 
laying the foundation of a widely-cherished expecta- 



* For an illustration of these passages, and for proof that they 
refer to the Messiah and to the atonement, I may be permitted also 
to refer to my Notes on Isaiah in loc. 



PROBABILITIES OF AN ATONEMENT. 155 

tion, is an undoubted fact; and the only question, 
SO far as pertains to the point now before us, is, how 
they are to be accounted for, or what is their origin. 
If not of Divine origin, they must either have been 
suggested by some instinctive feeling of the soul, or 
by some observed analogies of nature, or by some 
prevailing belief in regard to the character of God, 
or by some floating fragmentary tradition ; and in 
either case they would illustrate and confirm the 
position now before us, that there was some ground 
or reason for supposing that God would interpose 
in behalf of mankind, or that some arrangement 
would be made for removing the evils of sin. All 
these things combined — the fact that there was a 
general expectation in the world that a deliverer 
would come ; the fact that there are remedial arrange- 
ments for the removal of physical evils ; the fact that 
dangers are often prevented or removed by personal 
sacrifices ; and the fact that there were expectations 
and announcements, claiming to be of Divine origin, 
that an atonement would be made — may be regarded 
as demonstrating the probability that an arrange- 
ment would be made to meet the evils of sin and to 
remove the difficulties in the way of pardon. 



156 THE ATONEMENT. 



CHAPTER VI. 

NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 

The necessity of an atonement is founded on such 
considerations as have been ah^eady referred to in 
this Essay, — the difficulties in the way of pardon and 
in the restoration of an offender to favour. We 
have seen (ch. ii.) what those difficulties are, (1) if 
pardon is never extended to the guilty ; (2) if it is 
often extended to the guilty; (3) if it should be 
always extended to the guilty ; and (4) in any case 
by its coming in conflict with the regular adminis- 
tration of justice. We have noticed (ch. iii.) some 
of the embarrassments to which governments are 
subjected for the want of an atonement, and some 
of the devices, clumsy and ineffectual in their 
character, to which they are compelled to resort in 
order to escape from those embarrassments. We 
have considered (ch. iv.) what must be done by an 
atonement : that it is necessary that it should con- 
firm, and not set aside, law ; that it should carry out, 
and not set aside, the real purpose of the penalty of 
the law as expressing the sense entertained by the 
lawgiver of the value of law and the evil of violating 
it ; that it should secure the reformation and future 
good conduct of him who is pardoned; that it 
should preserve a community from harm if any 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 157 

number of offenders should be forgiven; and that 
it should furnish in its own nature a proper repre- 
sentation of the character of him who has appointed 
the atonement. And we have seen (ch. v.) that 
there were antecedent probabilities that such an 
atonement would be provided in the Divine adminis- 
tration; or that there were such grounds of pre- 
sumption that some arrangement would be made to 
remove the evils of sin as to excite an expectation 
extensively in the minds of men that such an ar- 
rangement would be made. 

The failure of every thing else to remove the 
necessary evils of sin and to restore an offender to 
the Divine favour lays the foundation for the neces- 
sity of an atonement. An atonement is necessary 
because there is nothing else that will remove the 
difficulties in the way of pardon, or because there is 
no other way by which it can be consistent for God 
to forgive an offender and to restore him to favour. 

It becomes proper, therefore, to inquire why, in 
this point of view, it is necessary that an atonement 
should be made ; that is, why sinners cannot be 
saved without it; or why, in the language of the 
Bible, "without shedding of blood is no remission.'* 
(Heb. ix. 22.) If there is any other way by which the 
difficulties in the case can be met and sinners saved, 
then of course an atonement is unnecessary. It is 
proper, therefore, to inquire on what they who 
reject an atonement rely for salvation, and to see 
whether such grounds of reliance furnish security 
of happiness hereafter. If sinners may rely on the 
mere mercy of God for salvation, then an atonement 
is unnecessary. If they can offer sacrifices for their 

14 



158 THE ATONEMENT. 

own sins which would constitute a proper expiation, 
then there would be no need of a higher sacrifice 
such as is implied in the idea of the Christian atone- 
ment. If the J may depend on the efficacy of re- 
pentance, and if that is all that is necessary to re- 
store them to the Divine favour, then also an atone- 
ment would be unnecessary. If men are punished 
in this life as much as their ofiences deserve, and 
if all that is implied in the penalty of the law is 
satisfied on earth, or if the same thing should occur 
in a future world so that they would exhaust the 
penalty of the law and expiate their sins by their 
own sufierings, then in like manner there would be 
no need of an atonement. If offenders can claim 
admission into heaven on the ground that they 
have — by their own abundant good works, or by the 
merits of eminent saints made over to them by the 
power of a priesthood — made amends for the past, 
then also there w^ould be no need of an atonement. 
And if it is a principle in the Divine administration 
that the maladies of the soul may be repaired, as the 
diseases of the body may be healed, by a recupera- 
tive arrangement in the very system itself, then 
also there would be no need of an atonement. 

It is indispensable, therefore, in inquiring into the 
necessity of an atonement, to examine each of these 
points ; for these are the things on which men who 
reject the atonement of Christ actually rely; these 
comprise all the grounds of the hope which they 
entertain in reference to a future world. Thus Dr. 
Priestley says, " "We are commanded to forgive others, 
as we ourselves hope to be forgiven ; to be merciful 
as our Father who is in heaven is merciful. But 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 159 

surely we are not thereby authorized to insist upon 
any atonement or satisfaction, before we give up our 
resentments towards an offending penitent brother. 
Indeed, how could it deserve the name of forgive- 
ness if we did ? It is only from the literal interpre- 
tation of a few figurative expressions in the Scrip- 
tures that this doctrine of the atonement, as well as 
that of transubstantiation, has been derived; and 
it is certainly a doctrine highly injurious to God ; 
and if we who are commanded to imitate God 
should act upon the maxims of it, it would be sub- 
versive of the most amiable part of virtue in men. 
We should be implacable and unmerciful, insisting 
upon the uttermost farthing."* 

In considering the necessity of an atonement, the 
question is not what God could or coidd not have 
done if an atonement had not been made. "We are 
not to go back of all the arrangements that are 
actually made, and to inquire whether the course of 
things might not have been different, or why the 
present arrangement has been adopted. In inquir- 
ing, for example, why labour is necessary for the 
husbandman if he would secure a harvest, or why 
the law of gravitation is necessary in the physical 
system of the universe, we are not to ask whether it 
might not have been otherwise, — whether God, for 
example, might not have provided food by his own 
direct agency without toil on the part of man, or 
whether he might not have carried forward the 
operations of the universe without such a law as that 
of gravitation. The question relates rather to mat- 
ters of fact: why, as things are, is labour necessary 

* See Beman on the Atonement, pp. 137, 138. 



160 THE ATONEMENT. 

for man if he would have a harvest? or why is such 
a law as that of universal gravitation necessary in 
this universe, constructed as it is? There is un- 
doubted force and truth in the following remarks 
of Bishop Butler. " Certain questions," he says, 
''have been brought into the subject of redemption, 
and determined with rashness, and perhaps with 
equal rashness contrary ways. For instance, whether 
God could have saved the world by other means 
than the death of Christ, consistently with the 
general laws of his government. And, had not 
Christ come into the world, what would have been 
the fature condition of the better sort of men; 
those just persons over the face of the earth for 
whom Manasses in his prayer asserts repentance 
was not appointed. The meaning of the first of 
these questions is greatly ambiguous; and neither 
of them can properly be answered without going 
upon that infinitely absurd supposition, that we 
know the whole of the case. And perhaps the very 
inquiry, what would have followed if God had not done 
as he has? may have in it some great impropriety, 
and ought not to be carried on any further than is 
necessary to help our partial and inadequate con- 
ception of things." 

The inquiry on this subject cannot be pursued 
on the principle of an a 2^'>^iori argument. We are 
not, for we cannot, so go back of the actual arrange- 
ment of things in the Divine economy, and attempt 
to ascertain what God could or could not have done ; 
we cannot determine beforehand whether it would 
or would not be proper that such a disposition 
of affairs should be allowed to exist as would make 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 161 

an atonement necessary ; we cannot argue that, be- 
cause sin is an infinite evil, therefore an in- 
finite atonement was necessary, or that it was ne- 
cessary that he who should make the atonement 
should be infinite in his nature.* But we may argue 
from the existing state of things. We may look 
upon the fact that man is fallen ; that sin has come 
into the world; that the law of God has been vio- 
lated ; that the penalty of that law has been incurred ; 
and that there are intrinsic difficulties in the way of 
pardon. We can look upon the course of events, 
and see what is the fact in regard to the efifect of 
those things on which men do rely as securing salva- 
tion, and argue from the failure of those things as 
to the necessity of some higher mode of interven- 
tion. We can ask whether it will be safe for men 
to reject the atonement and to rely on those things. 
We can see in the failure of all those things to meet 
the circumstances of the case — if they do fail — an 
argument for the necessity of an atonement. In 
this there can be no presumption ; for we are here 
manifestly pursuing an inquiry of the deepest in- 
terest to ourselves, and which lies within the proper 
range of human investigation. 

Such a course of inquiry it is proposed to pursue 
in this chapter. The necessity of an atonement 
will be argued from the failure of all else on which 
men are accustomed to rely for salvation; or, in 

* In what sense is it true that sin is infinite ? Ho-w is it ascer- 
tained that it is infinite? In what part of the Scriptures is it as- 
serted or intimated that the necessity of an atonement rests on the 
fact that sin is an infinite evil ? Where is it affirmed that sin has, 
in any sense, a character of infinity ? 
L 14* 



162 THE ATONEMENT. 

other words, by showing that no reliance can be 
placed on those things to meet the circumstances of 
the case, it is proposed to demonstrate the necessity 
of an atonement. 

The question relates to the salvation of sinners; 
and it is to be assumed in this discussion that men 
are sinners. Apart from the atonement, the only 
other methods of salvation by which it could be 
supposed that sinners could be saved are the 
following: — The mere mercy of God; repentance 
and reformation; punishment; repairing the evils 
of the past by subsequent good conduct ; sacrifices 
offered for sin; and a process of restoration in re- 
gard to moral evils — a recuperative process — simi- 
lar to the healing of diseases in the body. 

These methods of salvation it is proposed now to 
examine. There are no other methods, besides that 
of reliance on the atonement of Christ. These 
exhaust the subject. If a sinner may rely on any 
one of these methods, there is no need of an atone- 
ment. If all of these fail, then there must be an 
atonement, or the sinner must perish. 

I. The mere mercy of God. 

As this is perhaps the most general ground of 
reliance for salvation among men, it is important to 
examine it with care. 

It is undoubtedly true that large classes of men — 
men of all classes and conditions — profess to rely on 
the mercy of God as a safe and sufficient ground of 
hope in relation to the future world. The most 
general ground of the hope of happiness hereafter 
is, probably, that which is founded on good works ; 
on an upright character; on honesty and fidelity 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 163 

in the relations of life; on amiableness, kindness, 
and courtesy in the intercourse with each other ; on 
the belief entertained by many that they have 
wronged no one, that they have defrauded no one, 
that they are just in their dealings with men, that 
they are faithful in the discharge of their duties as 
husbands, fathers, neighbours, citizens. But this 
ground of hope may be laid out of view now ; for we 
are not inquiring whether it would be possible for 
men to be saved if they were perfectly righteous, — 
of which there could be no doubt, — but in what way 
a sinner may be saved. The question is. How may 
one who is conscious that he has violated the law of 
God obtain his favour again ? how may he approach 
him with the hope of pardon? The first of these 
grounds of hope is dependence on the mere mercy 
of God, with no reference to an atonement; and it is 
undoubtedly true that multitudes do profess to trust 
to this as a safe resort. The man who is externally 
moral, and who aims to lead an upright life, and 
who prides himself on his virtuous character, trusts 
that the few and unimportant errors of his life may 
be forgiven, and that he may safely rely, in respect 
to these, on the mercy of God. The skeptic — the 
denier of the truth of revelation — also relies on the 
mercy of God, and thinks that he may safely make 
it an article of his creed that God is merciful, and 
that he may in safety trust to that mercy for salva- 
tion. The Universalist is loud in his proclamation 
of the mercy of God, and in the expression of his 
belief that all men will be saved through that mercy; 
and even the dissolute, the profane, and the aban- 
doned, when all other hope of salvation fails, take 



164 THE ATONEMENT. 

refuge, on the bed of death, in what they regard as 
the illimitable compassion of God. 

And yet it may be doubted whether any of these 
persons really rely for salvation on the mercy of God. 
If the moral man, conscious as he may be of a few 
errors and follies of life, were questioned, he would 
say that he does not believe that he deserves eternal 
death, and that it would be wrong in God to consign 
him to future woe ; and thus he is depending for 
salvation not on the mercy but on the justice of God. 
The skeptic, also, if questioned on the subject, would 
not allege that he had any communication from 
heaven to assure him that he might safely trust 
to the mercy of God, — for all such revelation he on 
principle rejects; but he would maintain also that 
it would be wrong in God to consign him to an 
eternal hell, and thus he relies for salvation not on 
the mercy but on the justice of God. The Universal- 
ist, also, loud as he is in praise of the mercy of God, 
and stoutly as he maintains that through that mercy 
all mankind will be saved, yet as loudly and as 
stoutly maintains that it would be wrong in God — 
that it would be horrible injustice — to consign men 
to everlasting punishment; and thus he also relies 
not on the mercy but on the justice of God for salva- 
tion ; and, after all that he says in favour of the mercy 
of God, he has no belief that there is any occasion 
for the exercise of mercy in the case, but his system 
would be practically the same, and his hope would 
be precisely the same, if God were possessed of no 
such attribute as that of mercy, but were severely 
and otAj just. In like manner, also, even the aban- 
doned and profligate sinner would maintain that it 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 165 

would be wrong in the God who made him to doom 
him to everlasting wretchedness for the sins of this 
short life ; and thus he, at last, also finds refuge and 
hope not in the mercy but in the justice of God. 

But, if it were true that men really relied on the 
mercy of God for salvation, would this be a safe 
ground of hope for a sinner ? 

In reference to this question, let the following 
considerations be borne in mind. 

(1.) Mercy cannot be safely relied on by an offender 
in any human administration. We have seen, in a 
previous chapter, (ch. ii.,) that no government could 
safely offer unconditional pardon to offenders, and 
that pardon can in no case be administered under a 
human government without doing much to weaken 
the strong arm of the law. Mere mercy can in no 
case be made a ground of hope under a human 
government. When pardon is extended to the 
guilty, it is in most, if not in all, cases, done not on 
the ground of mere mercy, but on the ground that 
there was some defect in the process of the trial ; or 
that the sentence of the law was too severe ; or that 
there were some extenuating circumstances in the 
case ; or that there was something in respect to the 
age, the sex, or the previous character of the offender 
which made it proper to interpose with executive 
clemency ; or that there was evidence of such a re- 
formation as to make it proper to remit the remain- 
der of the sentence or to commute it ; or that there 
was evidence that the punishment had answered all 
the ends contemplated by punishment ; or that there 
was some new testimony in favour of the offender 
which was not before the court on the trial, and 



166 THE ATONEMENT. 

which might have modified the verdict; or that 
there is reason to suppose that, if all the testimony 
in the case had been before the court, the accused 
would have been acquitted : that is, so far as these 
circumstances bear on the case, the 'pardon' is in 
fact an act of justice, and not of mercy. 

(2.) It is to be borne in mind, in regard to depend- 
ence on the mercy of God for salvation, that there 
are other attributes in the Divine character than 
mercy, and that, so far as appears, they are as essen- 
tial to that character as mercy is, and that it is as 
important for the good of the universe that they 
should be displayed as it is that the attribute of 
mercy should be exhibited. " A God all mercy is a 
God unjust." There is as certain evidence that God 
is just as there is that he is merciful. In estimating 
the character of a neighbour, a merchant, a profes- 
sional man, a magistrate, — in forming our conception 
of a perfect inan, — we think of truth, and purity, and 
justice, and uprightness, as really as of kindness. 
"We regard these as essential to a perfect character. 
We have no conception of a character as entitled 
to high respect and confidence where these are not 
found. If we could conceive of a case in which 
there were no traces of these attributes, we should 
say, however merciful or amiable the man might be, 
his character was radically deficient. If we could con- 
ceive of a case where the attribute of justice is never 
exercised, — where a man in his dealings with others 
always disregards its claims, — however amiable or 
kind he might be, we should say that such a cha- 
racter was worthy only of universal detestation. 

It is worthy of special remark, as bearing on the 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 167 

point before as, that, when we say that the attribute 
of justice is essential to our idea of a perfect character, 
we say at the same time that it is essential to our 
idea of such a character that the attribute should be 
exercised or displayed. It would be of no value as a 
dor7nant attribute, any more than a dormant attribute 
of mercy or goodness would be. On suitable occa- 
sions, it is as proper that the attribute of justice should 
be displayed as the attribute of mercy ; and, if there is 
any evidence furnished by our instinctive sense of 
what is essential to the character of perfection in God, 
that one of these attributes will be displayed, there is 
the same evidence, so far as that source of proof is 
concerned, that the other will be. 

It is further to be observed that in all the arrange- 
ments among men themselves it is contemplated 
that there shall be as real a manifestation of the 
attribute of justice as of mercy, {a.) There are more 
laws made to secure justice between man and man 
than there are to secure the exercise of mercy from 
one who is wronged towards him who wrongs him. 
There are more provisions in the administration of 
the laws to secure the exercise of justice than of 
mercy. There are all the arrangements in the 
courts: the forms of indictment; the pleadings; 
the trial by jury; the writ of habeas corpus; the 
securities against false imprisonment ; the examina- 
tion of witnesses in open court ; the confronting of 
the witnesses with the accused ; the right of appeal : 
in fact, nearly all the arrangements in the courts of 
law have reference to the securing of justice. Those 
which, have reference to the exercise of mercy are 
comparatively few. There is little legislation in re- 



168 THE ATONEMENT. 

gard to it ; and few of the great conflicts in the 
world have been with reference to the exercise of 
mercy. Those great conflicts which have marked 
the progress of society have pertained to the exercise 
oi justice and not of mercy, — have been struggles in 
securing what is right, not what is to be expected as 
the result of the exercise of compassion, [b.) In like 
manner, it is true that justice is more frequently 
exercised than mercy. The daily transactions be- 
tween man and man are transactions of justice. The 
transactions in courts are those of justice, and not 
of mercy. The question on trial when a man is ar- 
raigned for libel, treason, piracy, or murder, is not 
a question whether he is a fit subject for executive 
clemency, but whether he has committed a crime 
that subjects him to the penalty of the law ; not a 
question whether he shall be pardoned, but whether 
he shall be punished. The dispensing of pardon is 
regarded as an event that is to be rare; the dis- 
pensation of justice is one that is to be constant. 
The former is left to an executive, with few rules in 
regard to its exercise ; the latter is guarded with all 
the skill of legislation, and all the sanctions of law, 
and all the precautions against abuse and corruption 
which can be thrown around the tribunals of justice. 

(3.) There is abundant evidence that substantially 
the same order of things is to be found in the Divine 
administration, and that the attribute of justice is 
the one that is prominently contemplated there. 

(a.) There are abundant indications in the world 
that there is such an attribute in Grod as justice, and 
that justice will be regarded in his dealings with 
mankind. This is found not only in the appoint- 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 169 

ment of law to regulate the conduct of men, but 
in the fact that evils are brought upon the viola- 
tors of that law as ^punishments, not as expressions of 
mercy. The material thought here is, that such in- 
flictions are an expression of displeasure on the part 
of God, and are designed, according to the proper 
notion of penalty, as has been before explained, to 
show the sense which the lawgiver entertains of the 
value of law and of the evil of disobedience ; not 
that they are in their nature disciplinary, or merely 
designed to reform. Abundant indications of this 
are to be found in the Divine dealings; and they are 
familiar to every one. They occur in the numerous 
instances in which a certain course of conduct is 
uniformly followed with certain calamities or evils, 
or in which the evil has all the marks of being a 
specific penalty appointed for that particular offence. 
The evil in the case is such as occurs only on the 
commission of that offence; and it so uniformly 
occurs as to show that it is designed to be a penalty 
for that offence. It is not of so general a character 
that it may be a matter of doubt whether it belongs 
to that offence or some other, or whether it has any 
relation to conduct considered as crime; but it is as 
particular and as specific as if there were no other 
offence to be punished. Thus it is, for example, with 
the consequences of intemperance, — where there can 
be no doubt that the calamities which come upon 
the drunkard are the consequence of his particular 
habits of life, and are designed to express the sense 
entertained by the Great Lawgiver of the value of 
the law which binds men to temperance, and of the 
evils of a violation of that law. The evils in the 

16 



170 THE ATONEMENT. 

case are of such a nature, and are so uniform, as to 
leave no room for doubt on the subject. They are 
evils which follow no other course of life, and they 
cannot be separated from that habit. It cannot be 
proved that the radical idea in inflicting these evils 
is that they shall reform the offender; for, as the re- 
sult shows, they do not tend to such an effect. The 
woe, the sorrow, the poverty, the disease, the dis- 
honour, that attend the career of the drunkard, — the 
peculiar form of the ultimate effect of the habit, — 
that form of insanity known as mania-a-poiu, — all 
have the appearance, and all seem designed to ac- 
complish the effect, of a specific penalty. The things 
that are essential to the idea of a penalty or an in- 
fliction of justice are found in all these effects : {a) 
They are so specific and peculiar as to show that 
they are connected with thai offence as the cause; (6) 
they are so uniform as to show that the whole thing 
is arranged on plan, and that they do not occur by 
chance ; and (c) it is apparent that they are intended 
not for purposes of reformation, but as a suitable 
expression of the value of the law in the case, and 
of the evils of violating that law. They become, 
therefore, a proof that there is such a thing as jus- 
tice, and that the world is not administered on the 
mere principle of mercy; that is, that men have 
much to fear from, justice, whatever they may or may 
not have to hope from mercy. They are not in a 
world of mere mercy, but in a world where there are 
proofs that God is just. 

The same remarks might be made of many other 
courses of conduct. In relation to licentiousness, to 
glutton}^, to fraud, to oppression, to murder, it might 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 171 

be shown that, sooner or later, all such offences im- 
pinge on some arrangement designed to show that 
there is a law in the case and that that law cannot 
be violated with impunity ; and what is material in 
the point before us is, that justice and not mercy is to 
be expected to follow as the result of such violation 
of law; that what is to be anticipated is not an 
expression of compassion, but an expression of dis- 
pleasure; not an indication that the offence will be 
overlooked and forgiven, but that it will be marked 
and punished. 

And we may refer here, in further illustration of 
this point, to the instinctive feelings of mankind 
w^hen they are about to commit a crime. What their 
nature teaches them to anticipate is not forgiveness 
and impunity, but punishment. They find within 
them, so far as their minds act at all, not an antici- 
pation of mercy, but of justice. The reproofs and 
checks of conscience, the dread of the consequences, 
the fear of death and of the judgment as viewed in 
connection with the ofience, all indicate that there is 
an arrangement in the human mind to keep up the 
idea of justice in the world ; but there is no corre- 
sponding arrangement when an offence is committed 
which has reference to the exercise of mercy, — 
nothing that points to the exercise of mercy as that 
arrangement does to the infliction of justice. 

In the actual dispensations of Providence, more- 
over, there are more proofs of justice than of mercy ; 
there are more things occurring that can be properly 
traced to the infliction of penalty, and that should 
be regarded as proofs that God is just, than there are 
that can be regarded as proofs that he is merciful. 



172 THE ATONEMENT. 

In other words, there are more specific things that 
can be directly and certainly traced to the idea that 
God is just J than there are that can be traced to the 
specific idea of mercy. There are, indeed, numerous 
proofs of goodness, numerous evidences that God is 
benevolent, and that he desires the happiness of his 
creatures ; but it is to be observed that these, for the 
most part, are found in the original constitution of 
things, or in the arrangements made anterior to the 
commission of crime, and therefore they cannot with 
propriety be referred to in this argument, for the 
arrangements which we are seeking for in the in- 
quiry about the mercy of God are not general ori- 
ginal arrangements of benevolence, but specific ar- 
rangements contemplated as following the violation 
of law; and the remark which is now made is, that, 
placing ourselves in that position, or regarding 
crime as committed, there are in fact more arrange- 
ments for the infliction of justice than for the exer- 
cise of mercy. 

In other words, judging merely from the course 
of events under the Divine administration, there is 
more to be dreaded by a sinner than there is to be 
hoped for; more that should lead a violator of law 
to fear what is to come than to cherish hope. 

{h.) There are in the world numerous instances 
of what may be called unfinished justice, or cases in 
which, for some cause, the infliction of justice is not 
complete, but seems to be arrested midway. The 
death of the individual, or some other cause, arrests 
the process of justice which was commenced, and 
whatever may be necessary to complete the process 
is reserved for another sphere of being. Thus it is 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 173 

often, for example, in reference to the drunkard. A 
process of retribution in disease, poverty, disgrace, 
is commenced; and we know what would be the ulti- 
mate result if the intemperate man should live for 
many years, — for we can see that result in numerous 
other cases. But he is slain in battle, or cut off by 
the pestilence, or stricken down in a brawl, and the 
process is arrested midway and he is removed to 
other scenes. So it may be in the remorse that fol- 
lows the commission of crime ; so in the sentence 
that is pronounced on a murderer, a thief, or a 
pirate ; so in the career of a forger. A sentence is 
pronounced and jpartly executed, but the offender 
dies by an ordinary disease ; or remorse begins to 
prey upon the soul with the moral certainty that, if 
life should be lengthened out, all the future would 
be embittered, but the guilty man is cut down by 
some form of disease, or by an act of his own hand 
is removed to another world, and the process of re- 
tribution which had been commenced here is checked 
midway. It was not a process of mercy ^ but of jus- 
tice. As far as we could trace it, it was the mere in- 
fliction of justice, with not the slightest intimation 
that there would be any exercise of mercy. 

(c.) There are strong probabilities that these un- 
finished processes of justice will be carried out and 
completed in another world. The probabilities are 
found in such circumstances as the following : — 

One is, that it seems to be necessary that it should 
be so in order that there may be consistency in the 
Divine dealings. There would evidently be an in- 
consistency which we could not well reconcile with 
a character of perfection in arresting a process of 

15*- 



174 THE ATONEMENT. 

justice in one case, and in another case in carrying 
it out in full ; in removing one to a world where he 
would, by the mere fact of the removal, escape a 
large part of the deserved penalty, while another is 
retained upon the earth that he may meet it in full. 
It is certainly more probable that the original ar- 
rangement will be carried out by the full infliction 
of the penalty, and that what is commenced here and 
is unfinished when the oflender dies will be com- 
pleted in another world. It would be difficult, if 
not impossible, if this were not so, to vindicate the 
Divine character. 

A second circumstance is, that, so far as we can 
trace the course of things, there is nothing to justify 
the expectation that the process of justice com- 
menced in this world and left unfinished by death 
will not be completed in another world. The pro- 
cess of justice is indeed often arrested; but there are 
so many cases in which, when that process is ar- 
rested, it ultimately, though after long intervals, 
overtakes the offender, that there is every reason to 
believe that the process will be completed at some 
period in the future. Long intervals of time often 
occur between the commission of a crime and its 
punishment. Large tracts of land or ocean intervene 
between the place where an offence was committed 
and the place where punishment is inflicted. The 
crime may have been committed in youth, and 
partially checked or punished then ; but the fall re- 
tribution may come, in some unexpected manner, 
only in old age. The crime may have been com- 
mitted in America; and far on in life it may be 
punished by some calamity that shall come upon the 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 175 

perpetrator in India or on the ocean. Why shall 
we not suppose that this arrangement will extend 
to the future world, and that crime perpetrated in 
the beginning of our existence here will meet a just 
retribution there ? that sin committed on earth will 
be punished beyond the grave ? 

A third circumstance is, that those intervals of life 
which for a time suspend consciousness — as sleep or 
delirium — do not arrest the arrangements for the 
punishment of guilt. There are many crimes un- 
punished when men lie down to rest at night. There 
is at the close of each day, just as there is at the 
close of the lives of individuals, much unfinished jus- 
tice. Yet neither sleep nor delirium arrests perma- 
nently the regular operation of things. The crimes 
that were committed yesterday and that were un- 
punished travel over the interval of the night's rest 
and meet the guilty as they awake to a new day ; 
the consequences of a particular course of conduct 
will travel even over the delirium of fever, or even a 
more protracted and permanent insanity, and meet 
the offender in their consequences in future life on 
the restoration to health and reason. 

Then why should not the same thing occur in re- 
gard to death ? Why should that suspend or anni- 
hilate a law which we find to be so universal ? Death 
annihilates nothing. Death may not — probably does 
not — even suspend consciousness as much as the 
delirium of a fever, or as is done by a night's sleep. 
No man can assume that death will do what delirium 
and sleep will not do, or that he may hope for that 
in the case of death which he may not hope for in 
the delirium of fever or a more enduring insanity. 



176 • THE ATONEMENT. 

"No man can assume that the arrangements for justice 
commenced here will not be resumed beyond the 
grave, and that the processes of justice unfinished 
here will not be perfected in another world. 

(4.) There is no such evidence that men are saved 
by mere mercy without an atonement as will make 
it safe to rely on that alone. 

The proof on this point is as ample as any pro- 
position can be where there is not a direct declara- 
tion from heaven, or where there is not absolute de- 
monstration. For, 

(a.) All the cases of Christians are to be laid out 
of view. They profess, indeed, to be saved by the 
mercy of God, and not by justice; but it is mercy in 
each and every case through an atonement, and their 
only hope of that mercy is that which is founded on 
the atonement. 

(b.) There is no other mercy 'promised to men in 
the Bible than that which is founded on the atone- 
ment. There the offer of salvation is ample ; but 
it is limited in the most absolute manner to mercy 
dispensed through the blood of the Eedeemer. It is 
a great principle, also, in all things, that when God 
has revealed one method of obtaining his favour, or 
proposed one mode by which it is to be secured, all 
others are, of course, excluded. That fact is proof not 
only that it is the best mode, but it is proof that there 
is no other mode ; and, whatever we may suppose 
may have been abstractly true about the possibility 
of any other mode originally, yet the fact that that 
mode has been selected and revealed to man as the 
mode in which God is willing to bestow his favours 
excludes, of course, all other methods, and is at the 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 177 

same time a demonstration that that is not only the 
best, but that it is the only one. The business of man is 
not to find out what method there might possibly 
have been of securing the Divine favour, and then 
to infer that that is now a possible method : it is to 
find out what God has chosen and prescribed; and 
that ends the matter. If, therefore, God has said 
that mercy shall be bestowed through an atone- 
ment, that excludes all other methods ; and specula- 
tion as to what might have been becomes vain, if not 
improper. 

{c.) The rejecters of revelation can pretend to no 
evidence that men are saved by the mere mercy of 
God. They have no revelation to tell them so ; for, 
on principle, and of design, they deny that any reve- 
lation has ever been given to man. No one of their 
number has come back from the eternal world to 
assure the living that they who reject the atone- 
ment made by the Redeemer are saved by the mere 
mercy of God. The rejecters of revelation profess 
to have no means of communicating with the eternal 
world; they have no means of ascertaining what 
will be the result of human conduct there ; and all 
their hope in the case must be founded on mere con- 
jecture. 

{d.) There is no evidence furnished in death that 
men can be saved, or are saved, by mercy irrespective 
of the atonement. 

The death of all Christians, as before remarked, 
is to be laid out of view here; and the death of 
no others furnishes such evidence as the case would 
demand that they who reject that atonement are 
saved. 

M 



178 THE ATONEMENT. 

Two reasons may be given why this is so : (1.) 
one is, that men who profess to rely on the mercy 
of God for salvation without reference to the atone- 
ment, but who, as we have seen above, really rely 
on the justice of God and believe it would be wrong 
in God not to save them, are often greatly alarmed 
when they come to die, — showing that, so far as the 
evidence in their case goes, this cannot be regarded 
as a safe ground of trust. The fact that such men 
are alarmed when they die, and that they then seek 
for some other ground of hope, is at least so com- 
mon as to show that no one can certainly anticipate 
that he will himself regard this as a safe ground 
of reliance when he dies. This fact is such as to 
vitiate any argument that may be urged in favour 
of the position that men may safely rely on the mere 
mercy of God without an atonement; for if this is a 
safe ground of reliance for salvation, it ought never 
to give way under any circumstances. In the pros- 
pect of passing over such a river as that of death, 
what we want is not a bridge that may break down, 
but a bridge that never will break down and that 
never does. In the prospect of the storms that may 
beat around our dwellings, what we want is not a 
foundation that may give way when the ^rain de- 
scends, and the floods come, and the winds blow 
and beat upon the house,' but such a solid rock that 
it will never give way, however vehemently the 
storm may beat upon us. Such is the rock on which 
the Christian builds his hopes. It never gives way 
when he dies ; for no true Christian ever doubts the 
sufficiency of that trust on which he relies, never 
doubts that if he is a Christian he is safe. Can it 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 179 

be said that no infidel, skeptic, philosopher, ever 
doubts, when he comes to die, that, if he is an infidel, 
a skeptic, a philosopher, he is safe ? (2.) The other 
consideration is, that, even if it were a matter of fact 
that they who reject the atonement have no mis- 
giving about the foundation of their hope when they 
lie down to die, this would not prove that this is a 
safe ground of reliance. Freedom from alarm and 
from the dread of death may proceed from other 
causes than that of safety, or from any well-founded 
assurance of future happiness. The calmness and 
peace of the dying skeptic may be accounted for 
satisfactorily on some other supposition than that he 
is actually going to heaven, or that he will be saved by 
the mercy of God without an atonement. In the 
sternness of the stoic, in the studied and cultivated pur- 
pose of the infidel philosopher, in the stupidity which, 
sin engenders, and in the paralyzing influence of 
disease as men pass away from life, may be found a 
sufficient explanation of the fact that such men die 
calmly. If it be said that the same solution might 
possibly, or with equal reason, be applied to the calm 
death of the Christian, it may be replied that we do 
not refer to that calmness in death as the main proof 
that the soul is safe ; for the reliance of the Christian 
is on what he regards as a promise made to men that 
if they repent and believe the gospel they will be 
saved. Their hope is based on that. Their calm- 
ness in death is not the ground of their hope ; it is 
the fruit or result of a hope founded on the promise 
of God. 

The conclusion which, it seems proper to derive 
from these remarks is, that it is not possible to de- 



180 THE ATONEMENT. 

monstrate from reason, from experience, or from the 
actual course of events in the world, that men who 
have violated law will be saved by the mercy of God 
irrespective of an atonement. It would be probably 
found, on a just analysis of their own processes of 
thought on this subject, even by those who profess 
thus to rely on the mercy of God, that the conclu- 
sions to which they come in their own case are based 
not on reason, but on feeling ; that they are the sug- 
gestions of a hope which can pretend to no solid 
basis ; that they cannot be referred to any facts in 
the world, and that therefore they are perfectly value- 
less to man. 

II. The question which next occurs is, whether 
repentance for sin will of itself be a sufficient 
ground of hope without an atonement. 

There can be no doubt that men often rely on 
this. Either as a sort of expiation for sin, or as re- 
commending them to God, or as being all that is 
possible in the case, or as in some unknown way 
making it proper for God to pardon on that account, 
men do rely on this as a ground of hope. They 
would allege that they themselves are required to 
forgive an offending neighbour ; that a parent should 
forgive a child; that it would be unjust, in the in- 
tercourse of man with man, to refuse to forgive when 
one who has offended is penitent; and, they ask, why 
may not God be expected to forgive in the same 
way? If it would be unjust in man not to forgive 
in such circumstances, why is it not equally unjust 
in God ? They would refer, perhaps, to the fact that 
even in the Bible we are commanded to forgive an of- 
fending brother " not only seven times, but seventy 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 181 

times seven," if he turn and repent, (Luke xvii. 4, Matt, 
xviii. 21, 22,) and that without any atonement or 
reparation ; and they would ask whether we are to 
suppose that God will act on a different principle 
from that which he requires in us. Thus, in a quo- 
tation before made. Dr. Priestley says, " We are com- 
manded to forgive others as we ourselves hope to 
be forgiven, and to be merciful as our Father who is 
in heaven is merciful. But surely we are not 
thereby authorized to insist upon any atonement or 
satisfaction before we give up our resentments to- 
wards an offending brother. Indeed, how could it 
deserve the name of forgiveness if we did?" 

The inquiry now is, whether this view is sustained 
by the actual course of events in the world so as 
to be a just foundation of hope for man ; that is, 
whether it is a matter of fact under the Divine ad- 
ministration that repentance for sin arrests the 
effects of transgression and restores the offender 
to the favour of God; whether it so reinstates him 
in the position in which he was before the offence 
was committed that he has no reason to dread any 
infliction of the penalty of law ? If it does, then it 
may be argued with plausibility that it might be safe 
for man to trust to the effect of repentance without 
an atonement. 

In reference to this inquiry, the following remarks 
may be made. 

(1.) It is clear that repentance is not what the law 
demands. No law of God or of man contains this 
as a part of its requirement, that there shall be re- 
pentance for a fault ; that is, that an offence may be 
tolerated by the law on condition that there shall be a 

16 



182 THE ATONEMENT. 

suitable expression of penitence after the offence has 
been committed. In no country, barbarous or civilized, 
has such an article been inserted into a code of laws 
as a part of its provisions or as connected with its 
administration. Ko parent would feel that this was 
a safe principle in the field of domestic legislation, 
even with all the guarantees and securities that 
exist to secure the observance of law in the sanctity 
of the household. ITo friend would consent to 
this as one of the conditions of friendship, — that 
any or all the obligations of truth, kindness, respect, 
fidelity, might be disregarded; that the proposed 
friend might even invade the sanctity of conjugal 
life and rob him of domestic peace, on condition 
that there should be suitable repentance and refor- 
mation afterwards. No man could make this a con- 
dition on which he w^ould be willing to live with his 
fellow man ; no neighbourhood would be safe if 
these were the terms on which it was understood 
that neighbours were to keep up their intercourse 
with each other. Law knows but two things, — the 
absolute precept, and the penalty: the one to be 
obeyed, the other to be suffered. All else than this 
belongs to another system and cannot be regarded as 
any part of the demand of law. It could not be argued 
beforehand, therefore, that such an arrangement 
was to be expected in the Divine legislation. In 
fact, there is no proof in the nature of things that 
such an arrangement exists in the Divine consti- 
tution respecting those who are the subjects of 
law. 

(2.) It is a matter of fact that mere repentance 
does not remove the effects of sin and restore an 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 183 

offender to the condition in which he was before he 
committed the offence. " The present conduct of 
the penitent will receive God's approbation, but the 
reformation of the sinner cannot have a retrospective 
effect. The agent may be changed, but his former 
sins cannot be thereby cancelled : the convert and 
the sinner are the same individual person, and the 
agent must be answerable for his whole conduct."* 
Even Cicero goes no further on this subject than to 
assert, Quern poenitet peccasse, jpene est innocens. 
*The penitent is only almost innocent.' Does re- 
pentance bring back the property that has been 
squandered in gambling or dissipation, the health that 
has been ruined by debauchery and intemperance, 
the reputation that has been lost by fraud and dis- 
honesty, the public favour that has been forfeited 
by forgery or fraud, the vigour of early years that 
has been wasted by profligacy ? Will any penitence, 
however sincere or prolonged, bring up from the 
grave the man that has been murdered, and re- 
store him to his family and friends? "Will it call 
back to the ways of purity the young female that 
has been led into a career of sin by the arts of 
the seducer ? No. All these are now fixed. They 
belong to the past. They cannot be changed. The 
health is permanently destroyed ; the property is 
wasted ; the sacred citadel of virtue has been taken ; 
the murdered man is in his grave; the victim of 
seduction is ruined. ^N'o repentance on the part of 
him who has caused any of these things can ever 
change them ; no repentance can place the offender 

* Magee on Atonement and Sacrifice, p. 66. 



184 THE ATONEMENT. 

himself in the situation in which he was before he 
committed the crime. By reformation a man may 
indeed regain an honourable position in society ; but 
even under the most favourable circumstances this 
removes but a part of the evils caused by a sinful 
course. It brings back nothing that was lost; it 
changes no facts in the past; it furnishes no as- 
surance of the Divine favour. The consequences of 
a sinful course are not to be turned aside by floods of 
tears. The erring female cannot avert the effects of 
a criminal course by nights of weeping, — by the fact 
that the heart is broken by the remembrance of 
crime. 

(3.) Equally clear is it that mere repentance does 
not remove the effects of crime on the conscience of 
the offender himself. Even though all the external 
consequences of sin could be averted by an act of 
penitence, still, there would be consequences of guilt 
on the mind itself which would not be removed. 
Eemorse, the sense of self-dissatisfaction, the appre- 
hension of what may occur hereafter, would still re- 
main. There is nothing in the bitterest repentance 
that has any effect in silencing the deep self-disappro- 
bation which arises from the commission of crime. 
That springs up in the mind entirely irrespective of 
the apprehension of the consequences of guilt and 
the dread of the future, — however it may, as a se- 
condary effect, suggest that there is much to dread 
hereafter. That feeling of self-disapprobation or 
remorse is one quite independent of any loss of 
health or property or reputation as the eflfect of the 
deed done. It stands by itself. It springs directly 
out of the crime. It would exist if there were no 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 185 

future to be dreaded, and would exist in view of the 
crime itself if it had done nothing to waste health, 
to destroy property, or to injure reputation. And 
this is in no manner affected by mere repentance. 
An offender, no matter how much he weeps, no 
matter how bitter or how prolonged may be his 
penitence, cannot, does not, feel that the crime which 
he has committed is in any way affected by his sor- 
row for it. It is none the less ; it seems to him none 
the less. Even should he wholly reform, and be- 
come eminently virtuous, that would not affect his 
own sense of the evil of the sin, except to deepen 
his sense of that evil. The same thing is true in his 
apprehension of what is to come as the reward of 
sin ; for sin not only produces remorse in view of 
the past, but it directs the mind on to that which is 
to come. By a law of our nature, the apprehension 
of what is to occur beyond the grave springs up in 
the mind just as the feeling of remorse does, — an 
apprehension quite separate from remorse, indeed, in 
its nature, though conjoined with it in fact. It is so 
separate that it must be dealt with in its own way, 
and be removed by an arrangement that shall have a 
special adaptation to it. And this is not removed 
by repentance. The mind of the guilty man does 
not feel any assurance, however deep the penitence, 
that there will be no consequences of sin to be ap- 
prehended in a future world. After all the tears 
that he may shed ; after the keenest mental sorrow 
that his mind can experience at the remembrance 
of guilt, it is still true that the apprehension in re- 
gard to the world to come will not be lessened. 
There is a conviction that the crime deserves a 

16* 



186 THE ATONEMENT. 

deeper retribution than the mere shedding of tears ; 
and there will be a conviction that nothing has been 
done by repentance to furnish any security that the 
sin will not draw on fearful consequences in the future 
world. No act of penitence, no tears or mental sor- 
rows, can remove from the mind the consciousness 
of guilt; none can remove the apprehension of the 
wrath to come. ISTo such act can secure to a guilty 
man peace on a bed of death ; none, therefore, can 
accomplish what is needful to have accomplished in 
behalf of the guilty. 

It is clear, therefore, that there is no reason why 
men should rely on repentance as a ground of hope 
in regard to the remission of sin. It is certain that 
there is no such ground of hope given by God him- 
self to mankind ; for the rejecter of revelation pre- 
tends to no promise of this kind, and no such promise 
is made to man in the Bible. It is equally certain that 
the course of events furnishes no such ground of 
hope; for, as we have seen, mere repentance does 
not remove the effects of guilt and restore the of- 
fender to his former position, does not take away 
remorse from the mind, and does not remove the 
dread of the wrath to come. And it is equally cer- 
tain that it has not been one of the principles of na- 
tural religion that mankind would be restored to the 
Divine favour on mere repentance ; for, if there has 
been any one thing more unequivocally declared by 
the conduct of mankind than any other, it is that 
something more than this is necessary. All nations 
have believed in the necessity of sacrifices for sin. 
Everywhere upon the earth bloody offerings have 
been presented to the gods as an expiation for guilt. 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 187 

Penances and pilgrimages, fastings and tortures, 
have been added to penitence. Bullocks, rams, 
goats, prisoners of war, old men and children, have 
been sacrificed to the gods to expiate crime and to 
secure the efficacy of repentance; and from the 
light of nature it is impossible to demonstrate — and 
therefore it is wrong to assume — that mere repentance 
will restore an offender to the Divine favour. Hence 
on this ground we argue the necessity of an atone- 
ment. That the atonement of Christ would meet 
the difficulties in the case, and would accomplish 
the effects necessary to be secured, is a point which 
a rejecter of revelation may fairly require us to de- 
monstrate. 

III. The next inquiry is, whether an expiation for 
sin can be so made by punishment as to answer the 
ends of law and to render an atonement unneces- 
sary ; that is, whether a sinner may so rely on the 
sufferings which come upon him as the fruit of sin 
that an atonement is not necessary in his case. In 
other words, is siu sufficiently expiated by the suf- 
ferings endured in the world as the consequence of 
transgression ? 

In considering this question, it will be necessary 
to examine at some length the subject of punishment. 

(1.) The first point relates to the views which pre- 
vail among men in regard to the design of punish- 
ment. 

The prevailing views on that subject are the fol- 
lowing : — 

(a.) That it is to protect the community from a 
repetition of the offence. 



188 THE ATONEMENT. 

(6.) That it is to deter others, by example, from the 
commission of the same offence. 

(c.) That it is to reform the offender. 

In these views there would be found no element 
in the notion of punishment based on the idea that 
it is an expression of the sense entertained by the com- 
munity of the evil of crime as such ; or that it is a 
carrying-out of the idea involved in the phrase that 
the offender ought to be punished. 

The arrangements in the community in regard to 
punishment correspond with the views just referred 
to, and with no other. 

{a.) There are arrangements to protect the commu- 
nity from a repetition of the offence, by removing the 
offender by death or by imprisonment. According 
to this view, punishment by death is not designed 
to express a just sense of the community of the 
act of murder, but to protect the community by re- 
moving from the world one who might, if he were 
suffered to live, repeat the act for which he is con- 
demned to the gallows; and the confinement in a 
penitentiary is not designed as an expression of what 
is due to the crime, but is intended to secure the 
community against the acts of one who could not 
safely be suffered to go at large. 

It is probably in accordance with this view that 
the modern notion that punishment is to be, as far 
as possible, in secret, has obtained such a prevalence. 
Executions are no longer public; and the utmost 
care is taken, in all cases of ignominious punish- 
ment, to hide it from the knowledge of the world. 
The prisoner in the penitentiary is not known by 
his own name, but by the number on his cell. ISTo 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 189 

one who may be admitted into the prison is allowed 
to learn the names of the convicts. Every arrange- 
ment possible is made to conceal the prisoner from 
the world, and to send him forth again with the fact 
of his having been in the penitentiary obliterated 
as far as possible, and with a very prevalent feeling 
that he has fully expiated his crime by his imprison- 
ment, if he has not, in fact, been a martyr. The 
community aims, indeed, to protect itself; but it 
seems to have a shrinking back from the very idea 
of punishment as such. The feeling with many is 
very slight — and it is to be apprehended that it is 
becoming more and more feeble — that sufferings are 
inflicted under the processes of law on those who 
commit crime because they are deserved, or because 
there is any thing in the law itself, or in the con- 
stitution of man, which demands that the offender 
should be jmnished, or which makes it proper in 
itself that for such a crime the offender ought to 
suffer. 

(b.) In like manner, there are arrangements to 
carry out the idea that the design of punishment is to 
deter others from committing the same offence. That 
this is one end of punishment there is no reason to 
doubt ; but the remark now made is that there is a 
very prevalent impression that this is the sole de- 
sign of punishment, or that it is no part of that design 
to express the idea that crime ought to be punished 
because it is crime. A large part of the arrange- 
ments for punishment are based on the idea that the 
sole object of punishment is to deter others from 
crime. Undoubtedly it is right that the idea should 
be kept before the community that this is a legiti- 



190 THE ATONEMENT. 

mate end of punisliment, provided that the essen- 
tial idea, which will soon be adverted to, is not 
lost sight of, — that punishment is intended as a proper 
expression of what is due to crime. 

(c.) Thus, also, there are arrangements based on 
the idea that punishment is designed to reform the 
offender. This is becoming a favourite idea with a 
certain class of philanthropists ; and there is a de- 
mand springing up in the community that all the 
arrangements for punishment shall be adjusted to 
this idea, or that this shall be the primary and pro- 
minent thought in relation to punishment before the 
community. The demand goes to the extent that, 
where there is evidence of reformation, the sentence 
of the law shall on that account be remitted and the 
convict discharged.* According to this idea, the 
penitentiary is not so much a place of punishment as 
a school of reform. But the purpose of reformation 
can be no part of the sentence of the law. This idea 
cannot be incorporated into that sentence; nor is 
the idea incorporated into that sentence, however 
it may be in public opinion, that when punishment 
shall have secured the reformation of the convict, 
therefore he shall be discharged. No tribunal could 
safely introduce that idea into its adjudications; 

^ As an illustration of the prevailing state of feeling on this subject, 
I may refer to a remark made by the Governor of one of the States of 
the Union when speaking of the applications for pardon : — '* A dis- 
tinguished jurist of this State, in a recent conversation with me, 
advanced the doctrine that when a prisoner gave satisfactory evidence 
of having become a religious man — as proof of which he was contented 
and did not petition to be liberated — no injury could result from ex- 
tending to him a pardon." — Journal of the Prison- Discipline Society for 
January^ 1857, p. 17. 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 191 

and, whatever may be the views which prevail 
in the community on the subject, iJie forms of law 
always will, and always must, express the idea that 
punishment is designed for another purpose than 
that of reformation. We shall see, in the progress 
of our remarks, notwithstanding what is said on this 
point, and notwithstanding the expectations which 
are cherished based on the idea that the design of 
punishment is the reformation of the offender, that 
the dependence is not, and cannot be, on the punish- 
ment, hut that it must be, and is, on a side-influence 
which operates in spite of the regular effect of 
punishment. 

(2.) It becomes, then, a very important inquiry. 
What are the ends of punishment ? If these are the 
true ends, then all the arrangements should be made 
in accordance with them. If the sole object is to 
protect the community from a repetition of the of- 
fence, or to deter others by example, or to reform 
the offender, then it is clear that, if these objects 
could be secured, the offender would be safely and 
properly discharged. 

{a.) The design of punishment is not revenge or 
vengeance; for it is not to gratify private feeling or 
to redress private wrong, — which is the true notion 
of revenge or vengeance. It is not the infliction of 
pain for an offence committed against an individual. 
It is always, though it may be for a wrong done 
to an individual, inflicted for the offence regarded 
as perpetrated against the peace of a community; 
against the lawgiver; against the law itself. When 
a man is punished for assault and battery, it is 
not pain inflicted considered as a recompense to 



192 THE ATONEMENT. 

the individual who has been injured or wronged: 
it is as a just retribution for a crime against the 
peace of society and the honour of the law, and 
the punishment is measured by that consideration 
alone. "When a man is punished for murder, it is 
not as an act of recompense to the murdered man, — 
for he is beyond the reach of all such recompense, — 
but it is for an offence against the law and the peace 
of the community. The murdered man is in no 
manner referred to in the case except as one over 
whom the law was designed to throw its protection ; 
and the purpose is to maintain the honour of that 
law and to prevent its violation. In the infancy of 
society, in the days of savage barbarity, when there 
were no tribunals of justice, a relative of the mur- 
dered man — an avenger of blood — might take the 
matter into his own hands and inflict summary jus- 
tice on the murderer, and that would be properly 
revenge; but the arrangements of a civilized commu- 
nity are designed to take the case out of the hands 
of the individual. The crime is punished, not as a 
matter of private vengeance or satisfaction, but as 
due to public justice. The individual who has suf- 
fered wrong is not even represented in the transac- 
tion. The law only is represented ; and the affair is 
no longer one of a private character, but becomes 
one pertaining wholly to the public. 

(6.) In this public view, and with this changed 
notion of punishment, the object is no longer to in- 
flict the same amount of suffering which was caused 
by the offence. That was the purpose so long as it 
was a private matter ; and that was the principle in 
some of the earlier statutes on the subject of crime. 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 193 

An individual inflicted the same pain which he 
had himself snfl'ered. The friend of the murdered 
person — the avenger of blood — sought the death of 
the murderer. In default of that, in some of the 
earlier and ruder stages of society, he demanded the 
life of some one of the tribe or family of the mur- 
derer, and pursued this by a steady purpose until he 
could bury his tomahawk in the head of some one 
of the family or the tribe, and thus avenge the blood 
of the slain. The same principle operates in the 
notion of retaliation in war ; and it cannot be denied 
that the principle of inflicting the same amount of 
pain that had been endured was found in the legisla- 
tion of the Jewish code : — " Life for life, eye for eye, 
tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning 
for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe." 
Ex. xxi. 23, 24, 25. 

In the progress of society, the views of men have 
been changed on this subject, and this principle no 
longer enters into the notion of punishment, and 
this is no longer the measure by w^iich it is in- 
flicted. "To apportion the punishment to the of- 
fence does not mean to make the culprit suffer 
the same quantity of evil which he inflicted by his 
crime: that would be both impossible and unjust."* 

(c.) What, then, is the design of punishment? I 
answer: While it has as a subordinate design the 
purpose of deterring others from the commission of 
the same offence and securing the safety of the com- 
munity, it has a much higher end as its main de- 
sign. It is an expression of the sense entertained of the 



* Livingston, Criminal Code, p. 129. 
N 17 



194 THE ATONEMENT. 

value of the law, and is the measure of the sense lohich is 
entertained of that value. It is inflicted because it is 
right that it should be inflicted. It is inflicted be- 
cause the oflfence deserves such an expression. There 
is, back of any idea of restraining others, or of re- 
forming the oflender himself, or of protecting the 
community, the feeling that it is right that the 
offender should be made to suffer; that he ought to 
be punished; that it would be wrong if he were not 
punished. And, when we see a man justly punished, 
we think of this not as tending to reform him, or 
as designed to protect the community, or to be an 
example to deter others ; but we think of him as suf- 
fering that which our nature tells us is right, what- 
ever may be the consequences in these other re- 
spects ; and in that view of the matter we acquiesce 
in the infliction. We may rejoice in the belief that 
these incidental eflects will follow from the infliction 
of the punishment; but we should regard it as a 
violation of justice if these views should guide the 
magistrate in determining the amount of punish- 
ment; that is, if it were only so much as would best 
tend to reform the ofl^'ender, or to deter others, or to 
protect the community. We demand something 
more : we demand that which will in some proper 
sense express what the crime deserves. The sufterer 
in the case, in our apprehension, is not a martyr: he 
is a criminal. The sufferings do not make an appeal 
to our compassion ; for just so far as they do they 
are either unjust, or our feelings are wrong. Our 
nature teaches us to discriminate carefully between 
the ills which one suffers by misfortune and the ills 
which he suffers by crime; between the sufferings 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 195 

of the martyr and the sufferings of the murderer; 
between the man who languishes in prison under 
an unjust sentence and the man w^ho lies there 
under a just sentence of law\ In nothing are our 
feelings more accurately defined than they are in 
making this distinction; in nothing do we, when 
we act out our nature, discriminate more accurately 
than in the feelings which we have towards the in- 
nocent who suffer, and the guilty. And just so far 
as the same emotions come to be cherished in a 
community in regard to the sufferings of the inno- 
cent and of the guilty, — just so far as the feelings w^hich 
we have in respect to the martyr become our pre- 
vailing feelings towards the man who is suffering 
the penalty of the law for his crime, — just so far as 
the distinction between a just compassion for an 
innocent sufferer and the feeling of approbation 
which we have on the proper infliction of the 
penalty of the law on the guilty shall be obliterated 
in public sentiment, — just so far will all the proper 
ends of justice be defeated, and the processes of 
justice become a mockery. If there is any thing 
that is deeply fixed in the nature of man, it is the 
conviction that certain courses of conduct deserve 
certain results; that when crimes are committed 
they should excite in us the feeling that they deserve 
punishment and are not mere objects of sympathy; 
that they should be treated as crimes, and not as 
virtues; and that they who have committed them 
should be treated as criminals, and not as martyrs. 

(3.) Punishment does not, in fact, reform men, 
and cannot be so arranged as to become a reliable 
means of accomplishing that purpose. A few re- 



196 THE ATONEMENT. 

marks may make the exact truth on this subject 
plain. 

{a.) Punishment may restrain men. so that the 
proper means of reformation may be applied with 
success. Detention in prison withdraws a wicked 
man from the bad influences which would otherwise 
surround him, and may be made the occasion of 
bringing better influences to bear on his mind; or 
the penalties which the law inflicts may so deter him 
from the commission of crime as to allow the better 
feelings of his nature to become operative, and thus 
lead him to become a difierent man. Punishment 
restrains from outward guilt; but its power termi- 
nates there. It does not go down into the depths of 
the soul and secure an effectual reformation; and 
our hope of the reformation of an offender must be 
in something which is beyond the reach of punish- 
ment. 

(6.) The tendency of punishment is not to reform 
men. It probably rarely happens when a man is 
punished that he does not feel that a wrong has 
been done him. The punishment, in his apprehen- 
sion, is too severe, or he feels that he is not worse than 
others who escape unpunished ; and he regards it as an 
act of injustice and partiality that he is arrested and 
punished when so many equally guilty are allowed to 
escape. Possibly, too, he looks at the circumstances of 
his birth and education ; at the temptations which were 
set before him ; at his own resistance until he was 
overcome by the power of evil; at the fact that he 
was led into the course which he has pursued by the 
example of others who have been more fortunate in 
their circumstances in life, or more favoured by the 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 197 

courts, and who have escaped. He remembers too, 
perhaps, that of which the court and jury take no 
cognizance, — which they knew nothing of, and which 
in their verdict, therefore, they do not take into the 
account, — his own long internal struggle against sin 
until, in a fatal and unguarded moment, he was over- 
come by sudden temptation. 

The effect of all this is to array him against the 
law, and to lead him to feel that his condition is that 
of a wronged, an injured, an unfortunate man, — a 
man deserving commiseration, and not a dungeon; 
that he is a martyr, and not a criminal. Just so far 
as this feeling extends — and it may be doubted 
whether the effect here adverted to does not extend 
even to cases where a man knows that the sentence 
is just — the effect is to embitter the mind against the 
law and against the administrators of the law. It 
is a rare thing, as any one may remember in recall- 
ing the scenes of his own childhood, even when it is 
known that the punishment inflicted in school was 
deserved, that the boy does not always remember it 
with an embittered feeling, — a feeling that a ivrong 
was done him by thus exposing him to public shame. 
It is a rare thing that one in subsequent life meets 
a teacher who has thus punished him, without the 
consciousness in his bosom of an aversion to the man, 
— a feeling that he did him a wrong. The memory 
of the supposed injury goes with him through life. 
At the time when the punishment was inflicted, his 
mind was in no state to see the evil of what he had 
done; nor was there any thing in the infliction itself 
that was adapted to create a sense of that evil; nor 
have his subsequent reflections on the transaction 

17* 



198 THE ATONEMENT. 

done any thing to impress a sense of that evil on his 
mind. The direct efiect of punishment always is to 
embitter the feelings ; and, valuable as it is for pur- 
poses of restraint, and indispensable as it is for the 
safety of society, and right as it is as an expression 
of the value of the law and of the evil of violating 
law, it has no tendency of itself to secure refor- 
mation. 

(c.) In the history of punishment, it is a matter of 
fact that it has 7iot been effectual in securing the re- 
formation of the guilty. If cases can be referred 
to where those who are punished are reformed, it is, 
as we shall soon see, from some other influence than 
that of punishment. But it is probable that there 
has been nothing more marked in the history of the 
world than the failure of punishment, as such, in 
securing the reformation of the guilty. It is a well- 
known and admitted fact that, when convicts have 
been placed together, the effect has been only to 
confirm the experienced in their guilt, and to in- 
struct those who were less guilty in the art of ini- 
quity; and when solitary confinement has been 
adopted as the mode of punishment, unless there is 
some 5Z(ie-influence to lead the convict to reformation, 
the effect has been only to embitter his feelings and 
to prepare him to take revenge for the wrong done 
him when he can escape from his prison, or when 
his sentence has expired. ISTothing up to the time 
of Howard was more marked or well understood 
than that the effect of punishment is not to reform 
men, and that there is nothing in chains, in the 
rack, in solitude, in hunger, in cold, in hard and 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 199 

unrequited labour, that tends to soften the heart or 
to send forth the prisoner a renovated man. 

It is beginning to be understood now in all the 
efforts that are made to reform those who are con- 
victed of crime, that it is by another influence than 
that of punishment that reformation is to be effected. 
It is not to be done by the harshness and severity of 
punishment: it is by sympathy and compassion. It 
is by calling in the aid of other feelings than those 
which are concerned in the infliction of pain. It is 
by showing kindness for the convict; by evincing 
sympathy with him as a man ; by introducing the 
provisions of the great scheme for reforming the 
guilt}^, and recovering the w^andering and the lost, 
in the gospel of Christ. The efforts of those who 
are endeavouring to reform convicts are directed to 
the w^ork of introducing the gospel into prisons and 
of securing its influence over the hearts of prisoners ; 
and just so far as there is evidence that that secures 
an effect on the mind, so far is there hope of per- 
manent reformation, and no further. It is not 
punishment that does this : it is a side-influence alto- 
gether; it is a system wholly apart from punish- 
ment. It is not the turnkey or the executioner that 
is the agent in reformation: it is the moral in- 
structor, — the minister of the gospel. 

[d.) In accordance with this view, it is a fact that 
no security is felt as to tbe permanent reformation 
of a prisoner from the mere effect of punishment. 'No 
one would anticipate that on account of any such 
effect it would be safe to discharge him from prison. 
There are no instances that can be referred to where 
mere punishment has secured an effectual and per- 



280" IHE AIOXEMEXT. 

manent reformation in a convict. Discharged pri- 
soners, unless there is evidence that they have been 
brought under a moral influence, are Jioi regarded as 
desirable members of society ; nor does a community 
feel safe when such men are poured upon it from a 
prison. As a matter of fact, a large portion of them 
show that there has been no reformation whatever, 
and are often soon recommitted to prison for a repe- 
tition of crime. 

(e.) Thus, too, it is in the world at large. Punish- 
ment does not make men's temper or moral cha- 
racters better ; chastisement does not reform. The 
sufferings that come upon the drunkard — his loss of 
property, the disgrace that attends him, the diseases 
which his habit engenders, have no tendency to re- 
form him ; scarcely do they ever check him in his 
career. The sorrows that come upon a gambler — 
his loss of property, his disgrace, his anguish of 
mind — have no tendency to reform him. The mas- 
ter-passion still controls him and urges him on, not- 
withstanding all the woes and sorrows that spring 
up in his path. So the afflictions that come upon 
men directly from the hand of God seem to have no 
tendency to reform them. Under those afflictions 
the heart becomes more hardened, unless the gospel 
of Christ is applied to the soul ; and, however they 
may check the wicked in their career, it is the gospel 
only that secures their permanent reformation. 

(4.) There is one more consideration to be sug- 
gested in regard to the hope cherished by men that 
salvation ma^' be secured as the effect of punishment 
without an atonement. It is this : — If salvation is to 
be attained in that way, it must be b^ having endured 



NECESSITY OF AX ATONEMENT. 201 

the full pmalty of the law. If that icere done, it is to 
be admitted that salvation would follow as a matter 
of course. If the entire penalty of the law is ex- 
hausted, if oil that sin deserves has been expiated, 
the law can have no further demands, and the 
offender might claim salvation. But he would be 
saved by justice, — not by mercy. He would assert a 
right to admission to heaven ; he would not go there 
hy grace. This is the opinion of a portion of those who 
believe in the doctrine of 'universal salvation.' The 
foundation of their belief is that men will suffer 
according to their deserts in a future state; that the 
degree and the duration of their sufferings will be 
different according to the different degrees of their 
guilt ; but that all will ultimately exhaust the penalty 
of the law, and, having suffered all that their sins 
deserve, will then be saved. That is, they will be 
saved by justice ; and to them an atonement would 
be useless. And, if the full penalty of the law 
was endured, they would undoubtedly be saved. 
But who can demonstrate that the full penalty 
of the law has been borne in any case? TTho 
would undertake to bear it as the basis of his 
own hope of heaven ? It is certainly possible that 
the penalty of the law may be everlasting punish- 
ment ; and no one who undertakes to endure the 
penalty of the law can demonstrate that this is 
7'ioi what the law of God denounces against sin. 
]N'o one can prove that at a given point in the future 
he could assume that he had endured all that the 
law demands and could therefore assert a right 
to be saved. Xo one can refer to a promise or an 
intimation that such a period icill ever arrive. But, 



202 THE ATONEMENT. 

unless this can be done, then an atonement is abso- 
lutely necessary for the salvation of the sinner ; that 
is, something is required which will answer the ends 
of the penalty of the law, and make it proper to re- 
lease the offender as if he had himself borne the 
penalty. 

IV. An atonement is necessary because it is im- 
possible for an offender by his future good conduct 
to repair the errors of the past, or to accumulate so 
much merit as to be a compensation or an offset for 
his former sins. 

There can be no doubt that men often secretly 
rely on this. The case is similar to what would 
occur in a child who had been disobedient, and 
who hoped to make amends for his fault by his 
future good conduct; or of one who had a task 
assigned him and who had neglected it, and who 
hoped to make up for it by an additional amount of 
extra service ; or of an officer in an army who had 
been cowardly or had neglected his duty, and who 
should endeavour to compensate for it by some ex- 
traordinary and uncommanded vigilance or deed of 
valour ; or of a servant who had omitted to do what 
was required of him, and who expected by labour 
performed at hours when his service was not wanted 
to make up for his idleness or neglect. In these 
cases the idea would be that there would be such an 
accumulation of merit, or that there would be so 
much service performed beyond what was required, 
that it could be set over to the credit of the past, as 
if it had been performed then ; that is, that as 
much service had been rendered on the whole as if 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 203 

there had been a faithful performance of dut}^ at the 
time when it was required. 

The question now is, not whether there may not 
be a case of this kind in regard to service demanded 
in the performance of a task, where the same amount 
of lorofit on the whole wonld accrue to the employer, 
but whether a compensation can be made in that 
way for crime. Can this be the ground of hope 
towards God ? 

In reference to this, the following remarks may be 
made : — 

(1.) It seems to be a clear principle that, in refer- 
ence to morals, no man can do more than he is at 
present bound to do. "We may indeed conceive that 
a servant who has a task assigned him for the day 
may have performed that task, and may still have 
unoccupied time in which he might render a service 
that was not specified in the contract, and which might, 
therefore, be set over to the account of a former de- 
ficiency, if such a deficiency had occurred from sick- 
ness or from any other cause. But no such case is 
conceivable in regard to morals. At no one time 
can any man be more honest, true, just, chaste, bene- 
volent, than he ought to be at that time. At no 
one time can a child be more obedient to his father, 
can a husband be more faithful towards his wife, 
can a parent be more just in his dealings towards his 
children or strive more to promote their real wel- 
fare, than at that very time he ought to be. At no 
one time can a man love God more than he ought at 
that very time ; for the command is binding on him 
at that supposed time in the same sense in which it 
has always been, — ■" Thou shalt love the Lord thy God 



204 THE ATONEMENT. 

with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all 
thy mind, and with all thy strength." (Markxii. 30.) 
It is impossible, therefore, that in any such service 
there can be a work of supererogation, or that 
there can be a service rendered which is not de- 
manded at that time and which can be set over to 
the credit of a past deficient account; or, in other 
words, that there can be any time not covered by the 
immediate command of God which can be employed 
in rendering a service that shall compensate for a 
former waste of time or for a former neglect of 
duty. 

And as these remarks apply to men now, so they, 
for the same reason, apply to the men of all times, — 
to the ' saints' of former generations as well as to the 
' saints' now. If the supposed services of the * saints' 
of other ages, in extraordinary fastings, prayers, pil- 
grimages, toils, labours, self-sacrifices, were merito- 
rious at all, they were meritorious only as demanded 
by the law of God at that very time ; for the law of 
God must always be the rule of that which is truly 
virtuous. It follows, therefore, that they could not 
at any time perform a service which was not de- 
manded then and which could be set over to a defi- 
ciency of former merit in their own lives, or which 
could be garnered up to be made available, under 
the disbursing power of a priesthood, to supply the 
deficiency of men in future ages. The only Being 
who ever could place himself in such a position that 
his obedience to the law could be made available to 
supply the deficiencies of others is He who was not 
bound to obedience, from the fact that he was him- 
self the lawgiver, and who could, therefore, so place 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 205 

himself in a condition of voluntary obedience that his 
merits could become available for others. This is 
the Christian idea of redemption ; and in this re- 
spect the Christian scheme differs from all others in 
regard to a work of supererogation or of extraordi- 
nary merit. 

(2.) It is equally clear that any future obedience 
on the part of one who has violated law and who 
has incurred its penalty does not affect the past. 
The past is fixed and cannot be changed. All his- 
torical facts become unchangeable, and must remain 
just as they occurred forever. A crime may be for- 
given or forgotten; but it cannot be changed. The 
individual who committed it may change, — for he may 
become an eminently good and useful man ; but that 
does not in the slightest degree modify the fact in 
regard to the crime. That remains just as it occurred, 
— more enduring in the nature of things than any 
record of brass could make it, — than if it ^were 
printed in a book, or graven with an iron pen and 
lead in the rock.' The act of murder was committed. 
N"o future good conduct can obliterate or modify that 
fact. The slanderous words have been uttered. J^o 
future acts of kindness can change or modify that fact. 
The act of seduction has been perpetrated. There is 
no power in heaven or on earth that can make that 
cease to be an historical fact. There it is ; and there 
it will remain forever. ]^o amount of future good 
conduct can summon the murdered man from the 
grave, call back the slanderous words, restore inno- 
cence to the seduced, or obliterate the act of injus- 
tice, oppression, and fraud. The sin of Judas is 
fi:xed forever; the crimes of Tiberius, l^ero, Alex- 
is 



206 THE ATONEMENT. 

ander YL, Caesar Borgia, Richard III., Philip IL, 
and the Duke of Alva, are historical facts, never to 
be blotted out from the records of the universe. 

(3.) In any case, even where there may seem to be 
a restitution or a compensation for the sins of the 
past, it is of a very partial and imperfect nature. A 
young man who is idle and dissipated may, indeed, 
by subsequent industry and virtue, do much to gain 
an elevated and honourable position in life, and may 
see7n to make up for the follies of his early years. 
But it is seeming only. There are two things which 
he cannot do. (a.) He cannot, by any subsequent 
good conduct, change the fad that he was idle and 
dissipated, (b.) He cannot gain the position which he 
77iight have secured if he had not been idle and dissi- 
pated. There was nothing in that course of life 
whicb was in any way preparatory to subsequent 
elevation ; and, whatever diligence he may manifest 
in future life, or whatever virtue he may possess, tbe 
time spent in idleness and dissipation was at least 
so much time absolutely lost in the sum-total of his 
existence. It contributed nothing to what he ulti- 
mately became ; it took away much that might have 
contributed to place him on a higher elevation than 
he ultimately secured. He ' fell off in the early part 
of the race ;' and no subsequent exertions can supply 
that deficiency, or put him as far on the * course' as 
if he had not fallen back in the beginning. Per- 
chance in a long life he can barely reach the point 
at which he might have begun actual life if his early 
3'ears had been spent in the ways of industry and 
virtue. 

V. An atonement is necessary because all other 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 207 

sacrifices made for sin fail in the object which they 
are designed to secure. 

One thing has been indeed established by the 
almost universal prevalence of bloody ofierings for 
sin, — the deep conviction felt by mankind of the ne- 
cessity of an atonement. On no other point has the 
faith of mankind been more decidedly expressed 
than on this. It is impossible to explain the exist- 
ence of bloody sacrifices in the world except on the 
supposition that they express the conviction of man- 
kind that a sacrifice for sin is necessary. Those of- 
ferings were undoubtedly made with the belief that 
they were necessary to appease the anger of God, 
and with the hope that they might avail for that 
purpose. The Jews entertained no other idea of 
securing the favour of God than by such sacrifices ; 
and every victim that smoked on their altars was an 
illustration of the sentiment which was at the found- 
ation of their religion, — that "without the shedding 
of blood is no remission." (Heb. ix. 22.) All the 
sacrifices of the pagan world gave utterance to the 
same deep conviction of the human soul and were 
founded on the same belief. "Whatever their origin 
may have been, — whether they are the result of 
a traditionary faith having its foundation in an 
early revelation, or whether they sprung up in the 
deep conviction of the human soul itself that such 
sacrifices are necessar}^, — in either case they express 
the all-pervading belief of man that an atonement is 
necessary to expiate sin. 

The only inquiry that needs to be prosecuted on 
the point now before us is, whether there is any 
evidence that such bloody offerings will be accepted 



208 THE ATONEMENT. 

as an atonement, or can be a proper reliance for 
the hope of pardon. 

This inquiry need not be pursued at great length ; 
for there are none in Christian lands who rely on 
such sacrifices, and they will not be renewed in those 
lands. Bloody ofi:erings in Christian lands have come 
to an end. The effect of the coming of Christ has 
been, somehow, to put an end to sacrifices wherever 
his religion prevails. It put an end to Jewish sacri- 
fices, — for it was a fulfilment of the whole design of 
the tj^pical representation, — and the Jew offers now 
no bloody sacrifice ; nor will he ever do it again. He 
has no temple, no altar, no priest ; nor will he ever 
rebuild the temple or the altar, or clothe any one of 
his own nation with sacerdotal vestments again. In- 
fidels also abjure the whole doctrine of sacrifice. 
They build no temples ; they erect no altars ; they 
consecrate no priests ; they lead up no victim whose 
life is to be offered as an atonement for sin ; and it 
is not necessary to show to them that no reliance can 
be placed on bloody offerings as an atonement for 
sin. Yet, in order to a complete examination of the 
subject, it is proper to show that no reliance can be 
placed by man on any such offerings for human 
guilt. 

(1.) There is no promise or assurance that such 
bloody offerings will be effectual in expiating sin. 
Unless they are founded among the heathen on tra- 
dition, — as has been supposed, — they seem to have 
been of the nature of an experiment, to see whether they 
might not avail to put away guilt, or whether they 
might not possibly in some unknown way secure the 
favour of God. But it is certain that among the 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 209 

heathen they were originated by no promise that re- 
mission of sin would be the consequence of such 
offerings. Among the Jews, where there was a Di- 
vine command for offering them, the purpose for 
which they were to be offered is clearly defined. 
They had no intrinsic efficacy, but were intended to 
adumbrate a more perfect sacrifi.ce in the future ; 
and all their efficacy was derived from their re- 
ference to the one great atonement. At no time, 
either among the heathen or the Jews, had they 
power to give peace to a troubled conscience ; for 
the statement of the apostle accords with all that 
there was in their nature : — " "Which [that is, the first 
tabernacle] was a figure for the time then present, 
in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that 
could not make him that did the service perfect, as 
pertaining to the conscience.'' (Heb. ix. 9.) At no time 
did they so satisfy the mind as to make it unneces- 
sary that they should be repeated ; for the statement 
of the apostle is true in this respect also : — '' For the 
law having a shadow of good things to come, and 
not the very image of the things, can never with 
those sacrifices which they offered year by year con- 
tinually make the comers thereunto perfect. For 
then would they not have ceased to be offered ? Be- 
cause that the worshippers once purged should have 
had no more conscience of sins. But in those sacri- 
fices there is a remembrance again made of sins every 
year." (Heb. x. 1-3.) As the design of sacrifices among 
the Jews was typical, — as they had no efficacy in 
themselves, but derived all their efficacy from that 
great atonement which they adumbrated, — when the 
real sacrifice was offered and the great atonement 

18* 



210 THE ATONEMENT. 

was made for "human guilt on the cross, they ceased 
as a matter of course, and ceased forever. It is de- 
monstrably true, as a matter of historical verity, that 
"they ceased to be offered very soon after the Re- 
deemer died. At the moment when he died they 
lost all their significancy, and within a brief period 
the altar was overthrown, never to be rebuilt, the 
temple where they were offered was rased to the 
ground, never to be raised again, and the entire sys- 
tem passed away. 'No human power could restore 
the offering of those sacrifices. J^ot all the imperial 
power of Julian, called forth by his determined pur- 
pose to overturn Christianity and to defeat the pre- 
diction of the Saviour that the temple should not 
be rebuilt, was sufiicient to rear that temple again 
and to restore the abolished worship ; and to this 
day Jewish sacrifices have never been offered again, 
and they never will be. The scattered tribes of the 
nation are utterly confounded; and nothing is more 
certain than that the offering of those sacrifices will 
never be resumed. They never had any intrinsic 
efiicacy in putting away sin : they would have even 
no significance now. 

"Without significance now to the Jew, and without 
a promise of acceptance as offered by the heathen, 
they are in fact, and with propriety, rejected by the 
infidel portion of mankind. The rejecters of the 
great atonement renounce all idea of sacrifice. They 
have no temples, no altars, no sacred orders of 
men ; they present no bloody sacrifices ; they have 
even no form of worship. In the entire world there 
is no infidel altar erected ; for it is a remarkable fact 
that wherever the gospel comes even they who refuse 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 211 

to embrace it renounce the idea of sacrifice alto- 
gether, and that the atonement made by the Re- 
deemer puts an end to sacrifice everywhere : — among 
the Jews, as fulfilling the design of all their typical 
rites and forms; among the heathen, as showing 
them the vanity of their own oblations by revealing 
a better ; among Christians, by disclosing a sacrifice 
that meets all the wants of their nature, and causing 
them to feel that there is no need of any other; and 
among infidels, who in the mighty effort to reject the 
greater — the real atonement — sweep away from their 
minds the whole doctrine of sacrifice, for when 
the sacrifice that has efficacy is rejected there is no 
reason for retaining that which could have no effi- 
cacy except from its relation to this. 

(2.) In the nature of the case there seems to be no 
reason to suppose that the sacrifice of an innocent 
animal loould expiate guilt, or would, in the Divine 
mind, constitute a reason why a sinner should be 
forgiven. ITothing of this kind occurs in the trans- 
actions between man and man. If one has wronged 
another, he may hope that an equivalent for the 
wrong done — an ox for an ox, or a sheep for a 
sheep — would satisfy him who had been wronged; 
but why should he suppose, if he has slandered him 
or done an act of personal violence, that it would 
appease him to sacrifice in his presence an innocent 
animal? to burn it before him. or to pour out its 
blood at his feet? There is nothing in the nature of 
the case which would suggest this ; nor has it ever 
been resorted to in the dealings between man and 
man. So, when a man has violated the law of the 
land, it has never occurred to the mind of the of- 



212 THE ATONEMENT. 

fender that he could make an atonement for the of- 
fence by the shedding of the blood of an innocent 
animal ; nor has it ever occurred to the courts of 
justice that an expiation could be made in that way. 
In like manner, so far as the nature of the case is 
concerned, there would seem to be no reason to sup- 
pose, unless there was an express statement to that 
effect, that the shedding of the blood of an innocent 
animal would be an expiation for guilt before God. 
It is easy, indeed, to perceive a propriety in thank- 
offerings to the Deity. There is an obvious fitness 
in devoting a portion of a harvest to the honour or 
support of religion, as a grateful acknowledgment 
for the goodness of Him who 'crowns the year with 
his goodness.' There was much that commended 
itself to the natural sense of obligation in man, in 
hanging in the temples of the gods, as was done in 
ancient times, shields and spears and helmets, as an 
acknowledgment of their interposition in securing 
a victory. These are natural expressions of grati- 
tude. They occur in the transactions between man 
and man ; and it is not unnatural to transfer this feel- 
ing to the intercourse of man with a Divine being. 
But what is there in the nature of the case to sug- 
gest the idea of a bloody offering f "What reason is 
there to suppose that, under any circumstances and 
for any purpose, it would be acceptable to God? 
What reason especially is there to suppose that it 
w^ould expiate crime ? As an expression of thank- 
fulness a bloodless offering might be supposed to be 
acceptable; but on what ground could it be sup- 
posed that an offering of blood would turn away 
wrath ? 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 213 

These considerations seem so plain that we are 
shut np to the conclusion that the idea of bloody 
sacrifices must have had its origin in a Divine ap- 
pointment, and that it was not one of the sug- 
gestions which spring up in the mind of man him- 
self. But, if of Divine appointment, its acceptable- 
ness and its efficacy must be limited to the idea 
contemplated by that appointment ; and as that, so 
far as we have any knowledge, was originally to 
typify or adumbrate the great atonement, such a 
sacrifice cannot be relied on now as an expiation for 
sin. 

It is clear, therefore, that no reliance can be placed 
on bloody sacrifices as an expiation for sin. Those 
sacrifices, under the Jewish code, had a purpose, — a 
purpose easily susceptible of explanation as designed 
to keep up the idea that an atonement would be 
made in the world, and as pointing to that. As 
existing in the heathen world, such sacrifices may 
be regarded as having a bearing on the present sub- 
ject in two respects, — both distinct from the idea 
that they were in themselves an expiation for sin, 
and both tending to confirm the argument which 
has been stated in this chapter. 

(a,) One is, that they may be regarded as a proof 
that an atonement by blood was early contemplated 
in the Divine arrangements, and as designed to 
transmit the knowledge of the original purpose to 
distant times and lands. 

(6.) The other is, that they may be regarded as 
expressing the deep conviction of the human mind 
itself that an atonement by blood is necessary in 
order to expiate human guilt. For, even if it is 



214 THE ATONEMENT. 

admitted that they owed their origin to a Divine ap- 
pointment, on no other supposition than this can it 
be presumed that an arrangement so inexplicable in 
itself as that of shedding the blood of an innocent 
animal for human guilt, would have so commended 
itself to mankind as to cause it to be perpetuated 
from age to age and diffused from land to land. 
Thus understood, the fact that such sacrifices were 
kept up does express the deep conviction of the 
mind of man that nothing but such a sacrifice could 
expiate transgression, — that 'without shedding of 
blood is no remission.' 

These facts also confirm the remark before made, 
— that on no one subject has the belief of man- 
kind been more universally expressed than on this, 
that the shedding of blood is necessary to expiate 
sin. Abel, the second-born of man, leads his sacri- 
fice to the altar, 'the firstling of his flock,' and 
pours out its blood. Why does he do it, unless as 
expressing his conviction that ' without shedding of 
blood is no remission' ? Abraham, the ' father of 
the faithful,' approaches the altar which he had him- 
self reared, and raises the knife, as he believes at the 
command of God, to pierce the heart of his own son. 
"Why does he do this, except as expressing the deep 
conviction of his soul that 'without shedding of 
blood is no remission' ? The ancient Jew offered 
the morning and the evening sacrifice as proof of his 
deep conviction that 'without shedding of blood 
is no remission.' Thus, too, it was in the Greek, 
the Roman, and the Babylonian temples. There 
thousands of victims bled, all to appease the anger 
and propitiate the favour of the gods, and all pro- 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT, 215 

claiming the deep conviction of the worshippers 
that ^without shedding of blood is no remission.' 
So with the worshippers on the banks of the Ganges 
and the Senegal; so with the Mexicans and the Pe- 
ruvians; so with the Caffrarians and the islanders of 
the South Sea, — all offering bloody sacrifices, and 
all thus proclaiming their deep conviction that 
^without shedding of blood is no remission.' Thus 
also the Brahmin, who lacerates his flesh or walks on 
nails that fill his shoes with blood, proclaims his 
deep conviction that 'without shedding of blood is 
no remission.' So the Christian, also, everywhere 
and in every age, proclaims the same opinion. He 
incorporates it in his creed ; he diff'uses it through 
his hymns of praise ; he makes it the burden of his 
prayers and his thanksgiving; he lays it at the 
foundation of all his hopes of heaven that such a 
sacrifice of blood was necessary, and that such a sacri- 
fice has been made : thus he proclaims to the world 
his belief that 'w^ithout shedding of blood is no re- 
mission.' Men conscious of guilt rush to bloody 
altars. They come leading up the lamb, the goat, 
and the bullock for sacrifice. They come with 
prisoners of war, with pure virgins selected for 
sacrifice, with their own children, and offer them 
all to the gods to appease their wrath and to pro- 
pitiate their favour, — under the influence of the deep 
conviction of the human mind that 'without shed- 
ding of blood is no remission.' The infidel is alone. 
The skeptic doubts, when the nations believe. The 
deist sets himself against the general sentiment of 
mankind, and holds to a scheme of salvation which 
is at war with all that man has expressed of the 



216 THE ATONEMENT. 

wants of the race. The Christian accords with the 
universal sentiment as expressed in sacrifices and 
blood-offerings. He believes that that sentiment is 
right; that it is true that 'without shedding of 
blood is no remission.' He adds this only, as the 
peculiar article of his faith, that such a sacrifice has 
been made on the cross. He looks away from Jewish 
altars and from idol temples to Calvary. There 
bleeds the Lamb, — the Lamb of God. There flows 
from his veins blood so pure, so rich, so free, that no 
other sacrifice is needed ; and as, by the eye of faith, 
he sees the life of that victim ebb away, his spirit, 
before troubled by the remembrance of guilt, becomes 
calm ; God, before dreaded, becames a reconciled 
Friend; the grave, so fearful to him before, loses 
its terror; and, though a sinner, he now looks 
calmly on to the eternal world; for through that 
blood there is 'remission.' 

YL The only other method in which, as was sug- 
gested on p. 162, the salvation of a sinner could be 
secured without an atonement, would be by a pro- 
cess of restoration in regard to moral evils, — a recu- 
perative process, similar to the healing of diseases 
in the human body. 

Of this, it is only necessary to make the following 
suggestions : — 

(a.) The course of things in the world has not 
been such as to show that there is any such ten- 
dency, or any such law, on which reliance can be 
placed in restoring men to God. There certainly 
has been no universal tendency of that kind. 

[b.) The healing of the diseases of the body is in 
a great measure an external operation, or is accom- 



NECESSITY OF AN ATONEMENT. 217 

plished, as we have seen, to a great extent by an 
outward and independent arrangement in the ma- 
teria medica of the world ; and, whatever recuperative 
power there may be in nature, it would not be safe 
to rely on this wholly, nor is it thus relied on. 
There is, in fact, an independent and outside ar- 
rangement to teach us that we should not rely on it. 
(c.) In regard to morals, men do not rely on any 
such recuperative tendencies in the moral system. 
There are extended arrangements for recalling to 
the path of duty those who have gone astray ; for 
appealing to their interests, their sense of right, 
their prospects for the future ; for making use of the 
influence of parents, teachers, friends, in order to 
recover the erring and the guilty. No man in 
whose child there are observed tendencies to vice 
and dissipation regards it as sufficient to rely on the 
recuperative tendencies in his mind ; no one fails to 
use all the outward means in his power to recover 
him to the paths of virtue. If all these means, 
therefore, fail, there is a necessity for an atonement. 



19 



218 THE ATONEMENT. 



CHAPTER VII. 

THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 

In considering the nature of the atonement, it is 
important to detach from it certain ideas which have 
been sometimes supposed to belong to it, or to show 
what it is not. Whatever difficulty there may be in 
showing what it is, there is, in many respects, much 
less difficulty in showing what it is not and cannot 
be. 

It is not necessary, in doing this, to examine the 
views which have prevailed at different times on the 
subject, or to attempt to confute an}^ of the doctrines 
which have been held. This would turn us aside 
too far from the main inquiry, and is in no way 
necessary to a proper view of the question. What is 
accomplished by the atonement? Those who may 
feel disposed to prosecute the inquiry in respect to 
the views which have been entertained on the sub- 
ject may consult the following works, — viz: Die 
ChristlicheLehre v. d. Yersohnung in ihrer geschichtl. 
Entwickl. v. d. altesten Zeit bis auf die neueste. Dr. 
Fried. Chr. Bauer, Tubing. 1838. Die Lehre d. Kirche 
vom Tode Jesu in d. ersten drei Jahrh. vollstandig 
n. m. bes. Beriicksichtigung d. Lehre v. d. stellver- 
tretenden Genugthuung. K. Bahr, Salzbach, 1832. 
A summary of the historical views contained in 



THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 219 

these volumes, and a general statement of the views 
which have prevailed in the Church on the subject, 
may be found in an article, founded on these works, 
in the Presbyterian Quarterly Review, vol. ii. pp. 
246-280. 

In reference to the negative part of the subject, or 
as showing what the atonement does not do, or what 
cannot be considered as entering into its nature, the 
following remarks may be made : — 

(1.) The atonement does not change God. It does 
not make him in any sense a diflerent Being from 
what he was before the atonement was made. It is 
not held, and it cannot be held, that God was, before 
the atonement was made, severe, stern, and inexora- 
ble, and that he has been made mild and forgiving 
by the death of the Redeemer. It is not held, and 
cannot be held, that he w^as indisposed originally to 
show mercy, and that he has been bought over to 
mercy, or that such an influence has been exerted on 
him by the atonement as to make him now willing to 
do what he was indisposed to do before. 

It has been indeed supposed, and perhaps is still 
by many persons, that this is implied in the atone- 
ment; and it cannot be denied that, in the represen- 
tations made by the friends of the atonement, such 
views have been held on the subject, and such lan- 
guage has been employed, as to lay the foundation 
for this supposition. It cannot, moreover, be denied 
that language is sometimes employed which would 
imply that it is supposed that there is a differ- 
ence, in important respects, between the Father 
and the Son ; — that the Father is stern, exacting, 
and severe ; that he is disposed to punish rather 



220 THE ATONEMENT. 

than to pardon ; that he is more zealous for main- 
taining his law and for executing justice than he is 
for showing mercy ; that he is rather a just than a be- 
nevolent Being ; and that the manifestation of mercy 
has its origin in the Son of God and not in the Father ; 
or, in other words, that the leading attribute in the 
Saviour is mercy, the leading attribute in the Father 
Injustice. Under this view, the Son of God is looked 
upon as amiable and mild ; the Father as stern, cold, 
and repellant. ISTor can it be denied that occasion 
has been furnished for this representation even in the 
poetry still used in the Church. 

The following stanzas from Dr. Watts, in so com- 
mon use in the Churches, will illustrate this idea : — 

"Rich were the drops of Jesus' blood, 
That calvrCd Ms frowning face, 
That sprinkled o'er the burning throne 
And turn'd the wrath to grace." 

Here the obvious representation undoubtedly is 
that God was originally stern, angry, and unforgiv- 
ing, and that he has been made mild and forgiving 
by the 'blood' which 'calmed his frowning face' and 
Hurned the wrath to grace.' 

So also the following : — 

'« Thy hands, dear Jesus, were not arm'd 

With a revenging rod ; 
No hard commission to perform, — 

The vengeance of a God. 
But all was mercy, all was mild. 

And wrath forsook the throne, 
When Christ on the kind errand came 

And brought salvation down." 



THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 221 

In such language as this, while something may be 
set down to Diere poetry and to the overflowing 
emotions of gratitude to the Saviour for the part 
which he has performed in the work of redemption, 
it is undoubtedly implied, by the fair interpretation 
of the language, that a change has been produced in 
God by the work of the atonement ; that in some 
way a Being before stern, severe, and angry has 
been made mild, forgiving, and kind. 

It cannot be necessary to prove at any considerable 
length that this cannot be a true representation. 

It would undoubtedly be a valid objection to the 
doctrine — an objection which would prevent its 
general reception in the world as a doctrine of reve- 
lation — if it were implied that any change has been 
produced in God by the atonement. Men would 
not, could not, receive such a doctrine; for there 
is nothing more deeply and indelibly engraven 
on our nature, and nothing more abundantly af- 
firmed in the Bible, than that God is unchangeable. 
The effect of any such representation of the doctrine 
of the atonement as that it implies that a change has 
been produced in God, that he has been bought 
over to mercy, that he has been in the literal sense 
appeased or made merciful and forgiving by the 
atonement, would not only be to lead men to reject 
the doctrine, but the book which taught it ; and it 
cannot be doubted that all such representations, and 
all statements of the doctrine which border on such 
representations, tend to promote, among large classes 
of men, infidelity. It would be impossible to com- 
mend such a doctrine to the mass of mankind, or to 

19* 



222 THE ATONEMENT. 

vindicate a book as a revelation in whicli this doc- 
trine was taught. 

The true doctrine on this point may be expressed 
in the following specifications : — 

(a.) God is unchangeable. In him there is no 
* variableness, neither shadow of turning.' He is 
'the same yesterday, to-day, and forever.' He is 
in no respect whatever a different Being now from 
what he was before the atonement was made ; and 
he will always be the same under all the circum- 
stances which may occur in the universe. His nature 
is the same ; his attributes are the same ; the prin- 
ciples of his administration are the same ; his love is 
the same ; his justice is the same. He is no more dis- 
posed to show mercy now than he was before the 
atonement was made ; he would be no less disposed 
if we could suppose that, from any cause, the efficacy 
of the atonement should be exhausted. The welfare 
of the universe depends on the fact that God is un- 
changeable ; for the very moment that the idea should 
be admitted that he has changed or could change, 
all confidence in the stability of the universe would 
be gone; all confidence in him, his truth, his justice, 
his mercy, would cease forever. Dismay would 
spread over heaven and earth if it were announced 
that God had changed or could change ; for what 
confidence could angels or men then repose in a 
Being who might still indeed have almight_y power, 
but power under the direction of no certain rule ? 

(6.) While it is true that God is an unchangeable 
Being, it is also true that he may consistently do 
that in some circumstances which he could not do 
in others. He may consistently grant a farmer a 



THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 223 

harvest if he is iDdustrious and if he ploughs and sows 
his ground, when it would be inconsistent for him to 
interpose by miracle and to grant him a harvest if 
he spent the time of sowing and ingathering in a 
place of low dissipation. He may consistently grant 
health to a man who is temperate, when it would 
be in every way inconsistent for him to interpose 
by miracle and confer it upon him if he should 
violate all the laws of health and pursue the very 
course which would tend to engender disease. He 
may consistently confer wealth on the merchant who 
consults the just laws of trade, and who sends his 
ships to distant ports from which there would be a 
prospect of a fair return, when it would not be con- 
sistent to grant it if his vessels were suffered to lie 
unemployed in the port. And he may consistently 
conduct the mariner across the ocean if he watches 
his compass and adjusts his sails and observes his 
chart, when it would not be consistent to do it if by 
indolence, ignorance, or intemperance he neglected 
all. So it may be in the matter of salvation. The 
unchangeable God may consistentl}^ offer pardon to 
a sinner now that an atonement has been made, 
though there would be insuperable difficulties in 
such an offer if no atonement had been provided. 

(c.) The essential idea in the atonement is, not 
that God was originally stern and inexorable and 
that he has been made mild and merciful by the 
atonement, but that the atonement itself has its 
foundation in his willingness to pardon ; not that he 
has been made benevolent by the atonement, but 
that he was originally so disposed to show mercy 
that he was willing to stoop to any sacrifice but that 



224 THE ATONEMENT. 

of truth and justice in order that he might show his 
willingness to pardon the guilty. He gave his Son 
to die, not that he might be bought over to love, 
but as the expression of love. This is undoubtedly 
the doctrine of the Bible: — "God so loved the 
WORLD that he gave his only-begotten Son, that 
whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but 
have everlasting life." (John iii. 16.) ]^o other re- 
presentation than this occurs in the Bible ; and, 
whatever objection there may be in the minds of 
any to the doctrine of the atonement, no objection 
can be based on the idea that any change has 
been produced in the Divine mind. 

(2.) It is no part of the doctrine of the atonement 
that the Divine nature, in the person of the Saviour, 
suffered. 

In regard to this, the following remarks may be 
made : — 

[a.) It has never been so demonstrated that this is 
the doctrine of the Bible as to lead the Church at 
large to embrace it ; and it is not the doctrine of the 
Christian Church. It is a circumstance also of much 
importance that this has never been charged on 
Christianity by the rejecters of revelation as one of 
its teachings. Indeed, it may be doubted whether 
such a charge has ever been made by any infidel, — a 
fact that could not have occurred if the doctrine 
were a part of the obvious teaching of the Bible, or 
if it were easy to make out the doctrine from the 
Bible by any fair rule of interpretation. ISTo doctrine 
would have been more certain to expose Christianity 
to the attacks of its enemies than this; and we may 
be certain that the keen-sighted rejecters of revela- 



THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 225 

tion would have availed themselves of it if such 
a doctrine were found there as an unanswerable 
objection to the Bible. As a matter of fact, Chris- 
tianity cannot be held to be responsible for such a 
doctrine, for it has never been an admitted doctrine 
of the Church, and no infidel could convince the 
world that this is, by any fair interpretation, the true 
doctrine of the Scriptures. 

(b.) It is not necessary, as we shall see in the pro- 
gress of this discussion, to hold this in order to a 
proper view of the atonement. If the doctrine of the 
atonement were that the same amount of suffering 
must be endured by him who makes it which would 
have been borne by those for whom he died if the 
penalty of the law had been inflicted on them, it would 
be difficult indeed to avoid the conclusion that the 
Divine nature must have suffered ; since otherwise it 
is inconceivable that the same amount of suffering 
could have been endured in the few hours in which 
the Saviour suffered which would have been borne 
by the redeemed themselves in the world of woe for- 
ever. But no just view of the atonement requires us 
to hold that the same amount of suffering was en- 
dured by the Eedeemer which would have been en- 
dured if the penalty of the law had been inflicted on 
those for whom he died. 

(c.) This doctrine cannot be believed. It would be 
impossible that a professed revelation should make 
its way in the world, or should commend itself to 
the mass of mankind, in which the doctrine was 
found that God had endured mortal pangs. Such a 
statement would so impinge on all the conceptions 
which men entertain of the Divine nature, that it 



226 THE ATONEMENT. 

could not, and would not, be believed. God can- 
not suffer and die. If there is any thing of which 
the human mind is perfectly confident, it is of the 
truth of this statement ; and if it were necessary that 
the Divine nature should suffer in order that an 
atonement should be made, it is clear that it would 
have been forever impossible. 

God cannot die ; and yet, in all the representations 
which we have of the atonement, the statement is 
that it was made by the death of the victim. It is the 
life that is offered ; the sacrifice is made by the 
shedding of the blood of the victim, for the life is in 
the blood ; it is the blood of Christ which redeems 
and saves us ; it is the ' blood of Jesus Christ which 
cleanses from all sin;' it is by the blood of Christ 
that we are redeemed. (See Romans iii. 25, v. 9; 
Eph. i. 7; CoL i. 14; Heb. ix. 12, xiii. 12; Eev. i. 5.) 
It will be shown in the subsequent consideration of 
this subject that the hlood or life of the victim has a 
value in the work of the atonement proportionate 
to the dignity or rank of the victim, and that, there- 
fore, in the work of the atonement, and as a part of 
it, the death of the Redeemer has all the value which 
it would have on the supposition that the Divine 
nature suffered. 

(3.) It is not implied in the doctrine of the atone- 
ment that the same kind of suffering was endured 
which would have been by those for whom it was 
made. 

It cannot, indeed, be denied that this view has 
been, and is still, entertained by some who believe 
in the doctrine of the atonement ; and it would be 
difficult to avoid this if it were an essential part of 



THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 227 

the doctrine that Christ endured the literal penalty 
of the law; for then the atonement would require 
the same kiiid of suffering, as well as the same 
amount of suffering, which the law demanded as a 
penalty for its violation. 

But in reference to this view of the atonement 
the following considerations are decisive : — 

[a.) The essential idea in the doctrine of the atone- 
ment is that of substitution or vicar iousness. If the 
doctrine of suhstitution is admitted at all, it would 
seem to be most probable that it would extend to 
the kind of suffering and to the amount of suffering, 
as well as to the sufferer himself. For the same 
reason that it is admissible in reference to one of 
these points, it must be admissible in reference to the 
others also; and it cannot be assumed that there is 
a substitution in one of them only, or that the same 
principle may not be extended to all that enters into 
the notion of the atonement. 

[h.) It is nowhere affirmed in the Scriptures that 
the Redeemer endured the same kind of suffering 
which they for whom he died would have endured 
if they had borne the penalty of the law in their own 
persons. It is, indeed, abundantly affirmed that he 
died for sinners ; that he bore the sin of many ; that 
the Lord had laid on him the iniquity of all ; that 
he was made a curse for us ; that he was wounded 
for our transgressions and was bruised for our ini- 
quities. But it is nowhere affirmed that the suffer- 
ings which he endured in behalf of the guilty were 
of the same nature as those which the guilty them- 
selves endure for their own crimes ; and it would be 



228 THE ATONEMENT. 

impossible for man to embrace such a doctrine if it 
were affirmed. 

(c.) It would be impossible for a substitute to en- 
dure the same sufferings which the sinner himself 
will endure in the future world for his sins. There 
are sufferings caused by sin which belong only to the 
consciousness of guilt, and these sufferings cannot 
be transferred to another. The sin itself cannot be 
transferred; and, as it is impossible to detach the 
suffering from the consciousness of guilt, it follows 
that a substitute cannot endure the same kind of suf- 
fering which the sinner would himself endure. Re- 
morse of conscience, for example, — one of the keenest 
sources of suffering to the guilty, and which will be 
a most fearful part of the penalty of the law in the 
future world, — cannot be transferred. I cannot be 
made to feel remorse for what another has done. I 
may feel deep regret that it was done ; I may feel 
shame, mortification, and humiliation from the fact 
that it was done by one who is intimately connected 
with me; I may suffer deeply in person, in pro- 
perty, or in my social position, on account of the 
offence; but I cannot be made to feel remorse. 
There is no way conceivable by which this feeling 
can be transferred from the guilty to the innocent. 
To transfer it is not an object of poioer; for, by the 
eternal and unchangeable constitution of things, it 
is attached only to the crime and the criminal ; and, 
as it is impossible that the guilt should be trans- 
ferred, so it is impossible that the remorse which 
belongs to it should be made over to another. 

It follows, therefore, that, whatever may enter into 
an atonement, it cannot be implied that the sub- 



THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 229 

stitute endured the same kind of sufferings which the 
guilty would themselves endure. 

(4.) It is not meant by the atonement that the 
same amount of suffering was endured which would 
have been endured by the guilty themselves. 

It is not to be denied that it has been maintained 
that Christ did actually endure the same amount of 
suffering which the elect would have suffered if they 
had borne the penalty of the law themselves. This, 
indeed, has been held to be essential to the very 
nature of the atonement; and the whole conception 
of the atonement, according to this view, is that it 
is a mere transfer of guilt and suffering from the 
guilty to the innocent. 

But the objections to this view are so insuperable 
that it is remarkable that the opinion has ever been 
held. 

[a.) It is impossible that this should have oc- 
curred unless the Divine nature actually suffered. If 
that were so, then it might be conceivable that an 
amount of suffering might have been endured in the 
time during which the Eedeemer was on the cross 
which would be equal to all that those for whom he 
died would endure if in their own persons they 
bore the penalty of the law forever; for, if an 
infinite Being could thus suffer, the very fact that he 
is infinite would make such a supposition possible. 
But on no other supposition can it be conceived 
that, in the hours in which the Bedeemer hung on 
the cross, or in the whole length of a human life, an 
amount of suffering could have been endured which 
would be equal to what countless millions could 
endure in the world of woe if prolonged to eternity. 

20 



230 THE ATONEMENT. 

(b.) The supposition that such an amount of suf- 
fering is necessary, is contrary to the essential notion 
of an atonement. An atonement is, properly, an 
arrangement by which the literal infliction of the 
penalty due to sin may be avoided; it is something 
which may be substituted in the place of punishment ; 
it is that which will answer the same end which 
would be secured by the literal infliction of the 
penalty of the law. It is not a commercial transac- 
tion, — a matter of debt and payment, of profit and 
loss. It pertains to law, to government, to holi- 
ness ; not to literal debt and payment. Sin is crime, 
not debt; it is guilt, not a failure in a pecuniary 
obligation. The atonement pertains to love, and 
mercy, and truth, and kindness, as well as to justice. 
It looks benignantly on a world of sinners; it 
regards a race of ofiTenders with compassion; it 
seeks to alleviate and lessen suffering ; and it is not, 
therefore, the cold and stern business of paying a 
debt, — of meeting the mere demands of justice and 
of law. It seeks to bring back wanderers by the 
consideration that God loves them, — that they may 
be forgiven, — that salvation is free for all men if 
they choose to avail themselves of it. It is real and 
not imaginary salvation. It proceeds on the suppo- 
sition that there is gain to the universe by the atone- 
ment, and that it will lessen the amount of misery ; 
not that it is a mere transfer of pain from the guilty 
to the innocent. 

(c.) If the same amount of suffering were endured 
by him who makes the atonement which would 
have been by the guilty themselves, it is obvious 
that there would have been no gain to the universe ; 



THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 231 

no augmented happiness, no diminution of suf- 
fering. The simple and the sole account of the 
matter would be, that there had been a transfer of 
just so much suffering from the guilty to the inno- 
cent ; a setting over of so much debt from him who 
owed it to him who did not. There might, indeed, 
be benevolence in him who assumed the debt or 
who endured the pain, but there would be no dimi- 
nution of the actual suffering endured in the uni- 
verse; and it would be impossible to answer the 
question which would be asked, whether it is de- 
sirable that punishment should be transferred from 
the guilty to the innocent ; whether it would not 
be better, if the same amount of suffering is to be 
endured, that it should be borne by him who does 
deserve it than by him who does not. This ques- 
tion it would be difficult to answer even if the sub- 
stitute were wholly voluntary in assuming the suf- 
fering in the case : it becomes wholly impossible to 
answer it if it is imposed upon the sufferer and 
exacted of him. 

{d.) It is clear that, if such were the nature of 
the atonement, there could be no mercy in the case. 
"When a debt is paid, there is no forgiveness ; when 
a penalty is endured, there is no mercy. It is an 
affair of strict and inexorable justice. In the case 
of one who should be willing to pay the debt or to 
endure the suffering, there may be the highest 
benevolence; but there is no mercy exhibited by 
him to whom the debt is paid or the penalty of 
whose law has been borne. If it is a pecuniary 
transaction, it is a matter of indifference to him to 
whom the debt is owing whether it is paid by him 



232 THE ATONEMENT. 

who contracted it, or by a friend; and in a case 
where it is supposed that the exact punishment due to 
sin is borne by another, whatever kindness there may 
be in him who endures it, there is no mercy in him 
who has exacted the penalty, though he has accepted 
the offering made by the substitute. The full penalty 
has been exacted, and all the demands in the case 
have been complied with. It would have been kind- 
ness, indeed, in an Egyptian to have come in volun- 
tarily and aided the oppressed and burdened Hebrew 
to furnish the ^tale of bricks;' but there would have 
been no kindness or compassion evinced by the 
taskmaster who had appointed the task, for the 
whole demand would have been complied with. So 
far as he who performed the work was concerned, 
and so far as the burdened Hebrew was concerned, 
it would have been a transaction of mere law and 
justice; so far as the taskmaster was concerned, 
there would have been in the case neither mercy 
nor compassion. 

Kow, it need scarcely be said that this view is 
entirely contrary to all the representations of the 
atonement in the Scriptures. Nothing is more plain 
than that the whole transaction there is represented 
as one of mercy; that it is designed to illustrate the 
love, as well as the justice, of God. 

If it should be said that there was mercy in the 
gift of a Saviour, and that so far as that is concerned 
the transaction is one of mercy, though so far as the 
law is concerned the transaction is one of justice, it 
may be replied that this is not the representation of 
the Bible. The idea of mercy pervades it through- 
out. It is not only mercy in providing an atone- 



THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 233 

ment; it is mercy to the sinner. There is mercy 
in the case. There is love. There is more than a 
mere exaction of the penalty. There is more than a 
transfer. There is a lessening of suffering. There 
is a substitution of a less amount of pain as actually 
endured in the place of the pain that was threat- 
ened. There is an actual gain of happiness to 
the universe ; not a mere transfer of so much pain 
from the guilty to the innocent. This representa- 
tion is apparent everywhere in the Scriptures ; and 
no one can rise from the perusal of the New Testa- 
ment without the impression that the scheme is one 
that lays the foundation for gratitude and thanks- 
giving as an exercise of mercy in the largest sense, 
and that the songs of the redeemed in heaven are 
not based on the idea that it is a transaction of 
mere justice, or on the idea that it is a mere com- 
mercial transaction, — a quid pro quo, — but on the idea 
that a new provision has been introduced into the 
government of the universe, by which suffering may 

be DIMINISHED. 

(5.) It is not meant by the atonement that Christ 
endured the literal penalty of the law. 

The penalty of the law, as we have seen, is what 
is threatened or inflicted by the lawgiver as an ex- 
pression of his sense of the value of the law and 
of the evil of violating it. The penalty may be 
measured or determined {a) by an actual statement 
on his part of what he will inflict, or what the viola- 
tion of the law deserves, or (b) by what actually 
comes upon the offender under his administration as 
the consequence of violating the law. In other 
words, we may learn what is the penalty of the law 

20* 



234 THE ATONEMENT. 

from revelation, or from observation of the actual 
course of events, or from both combined. The 
actual threatening may or may not cover the whole 
ground; and what the penalty is, may be learned 
partly from the statement, and partly from observa- 
tion. As a matter of fact, we ascertain, in a great 
measure, what the penalty of violating the Divine 
law is, from observation. Thus, we learn what is 
the penalty of intemperance, partly from the pre- 
vious statement of what ivill be the consequences, 
and partly from an actual observation of the evils 
which come upon the drunkard. To know what the 
real penalty is, we must look at all those conse- 
quences on the body and the soul ; on the property 
and the peace of the drunkard ; on his family and 
his reputation; on the effects in delirium tremens, 
in his wretched death, in his dishonoured memory, 
and in the woes endured forever. All these, and 
not a part of them, are designed to express the Law- 
giver's sense of the value of the law and the evil of 
its violation. To endure, therefore, the penalty of 
the law in the case of intemperance is to bear all 
the evils which it actually brings on the offender in 
this world and in the world to come. If a substi- 
tute, therefore, should endure the literal penalty of 
the law, all must be endured which would actually 
come upon the offender himself. 

It should be added, moreover, that a penalty is 
what is denounced against the offender himself and 
no other. The law utters no threat against the in- 
nocent ; it inflicts no suffering on those who obey 
it, which can properly be regarded as punishment. 
The crime and the penalty are in the same line ; 



THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 235 

they pertain to the same person ; they cannot be 
separated except as the penalty shall be removed by 
pardon or substitution ; they are not shifting and 
vacillating ; they are not capable of being transferred 
to different persons. They can no more be sepa- 
rated than the qualities of colour, ductility, mallea- 
bility, or weight, for example, can be separated from 
gold and transferred to silver or lead. 

If we look, then, at what actually /o^?02(;5 from the 
infraction of the Divine law, and what is, therefore, 
a part of the penalty, we shall see that there are suf- 
ferings which could not by any possibility be trans- 
ferred to a substitute. They are of such a nature 
that they always adhere to the offender himself; and 
it is absolutely certain, therefore, that the Redeemer 
did not endure them on the cross. 

(a.) Remorse of conscience is manifestly a part of 
the penalty of the law ; that is, it is a portion of what 
the law inflicts as expressing the sense which the Law- 
giver entertains of the value of the law and of the evil 
of its violation. But this is connected only with the 
personal violation of the law. It is never found in 
an innocent bosom. It never springs up from the 
performance of a light action. It can in no way be 
connected with the consciousness of innocence. It 
has all the marks of being a mere Divine appoint- 
ment designed to furnish evidence to the soul itself 
that what has been done is wrong, and to be a 
measure of the wrong as it is estimated by the law- 
giver. There is no more certain proof that there is 
a moral government, and that God is a lawgiver, 
than is furnished by the fact that the mind is made 
to judge of the evil of its own doings, and that this 



236 THE ATONEMENT. 

silent but terrible infliction comes upon the violator 
of law through the action of the mind itself. It is 
an internal arrangement, connected with the very 
workings of the soul, which could have been origi- 
nated only by the Maker of the soul, and who in- 
tends that sin shall always be punished. 

Yet it is certain that the Redeemer never suffered 
remorse of conscience. In the history of his life 
there is not a hint that can be tortured into evidence 
that he did ; and in the nature of the case it was 
impossible that he should. For remorse cannot be 
attached to innocence. It is the result and com- 
panion of guilt, and it cannot be transferred from 
the guilty to the innocent. I may weep for the sin 
of others ; I may be involved in calamity on account 
of their guilt ; I may hang my head in shame when 
one who is closely connected with me has been 
guilty of crime; but I can never be made to feel 
remorse on account of the guilt of any other being 
but myself. It is not an object of power to make 
this feeling spring up in the mind of any other than 
the offender himself. And if this is true, then it is 
certain that there is one portion of the penalty of the 
law which the Redeemer did not endure in making 
an atonement. 

{b.) Equally certain is it that he did not endure 
eternal death. 

It will be admitted, by those who believe in the 
necessity of an atonement, that eternal death was 
the penalty of the law. So far, therefore, as they are 
concerned, this may be assumed ; and this is all that 
is necessary to be assumed in considering the point 
now before us. 



THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 237 

Assuming that the penalty of the law is eternal 
death, then it is plain, as a matter of simple fact, 
that the penalty was not endured in making the atone- 
ment. Fearful and awful as the sufferings of the Re- 
deemer were, they were not eternal. They were closed 
in a few hours ; and by no possibility of fiction can it 
be imagined that they were eternal. If it should be 
said that they were equal in amount to the eternal 
sufferings of those for whom he died, — whatever 
might be true on that question, — yet as a matter of 
fact they were not eternal in duration. But, if the 
punishment of the wicked will be eternal, it is clear 
that that is a part of the penalty of the law. The 
lengthening out of the duration of the suffering to 
eternity is not a circumstance which has been added 
since the law was broken as supplementary to the ori- 
ginal threatening, and it is not that which springs up 
from the mere nature of the case independently of 
the Divine appointment. E"o man can possibly hold 
that the Redeemer endured eternal sorrow ; and no 
man, therefore, who believes that the penalty of the 
law is eternal death, can consistently maintain that 
he endured the literal penalty of the law. 

(6.) It cannot be supposed, as has been before 
shown, that the sufferings of the Redeemer were 
equal to all the sufferings which would have been 
endured by those for whom he died if they had 
borne the penalty of the law in their own persons. 
It is not possible to believe this unless it be main- 
tained that the Divine nature suffered; for on no 
other supposition can it be held that the agonies 
endured by the Redeemer on the cross — intense as 
they were — could have equalled, in any proper sense, 



238 THE ATONEMENT. 

what would be endured even by a single sufferer if 
prolonged forever. 

11. Laying these things, therefore, out of view, as 
being either in themselves impossible, or as not 
necessary in any proper conception of the atone- 
ment, I proceed to the second and main inquiry, 
— what the atonement is. Probably this is the most 
difficult question which ever comes before the human 
mind. 

It may be observed, at the outset, that there may 
be an error in supposing that the atonement was 
confined to one thing, or that only one result was 
contemplated by it and accomplished by it. 

If the remarks made in the preceding chapters 
are well founded, then it is manifest that there were 
many things which it was necessary to accomplish 
by an atonement, or many ends to be reached. We 
have seen that there are numerous difficulties in a 
human administration in reference to pardon ; that 
it is not one thing only which grows out of the com- 
mission of crime which embarrasses a human govern- 
ment, but that there are many things to be provided 
for in order that pardon may be dispensed con- 
sistently with the honour of the law and the welfare 
of the community. We have seen (ch. iv.) that in 
an atonement it is necessary to secure the following 
objects: — the honour of the law; the proper im- 
pression in regard to the evil of sin as contemplated 
by the law ; the reformation and future good con- 
duct of him who is pardoned ; the safety of the com- 
munity; and a fair representation, so far as the 
atonement may bear on it, of ^e character of the 
lawgiver. 



THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 239 

The inquiry now is, What is the atonement in 
reference to these points ? 

As preliminary to this inquiry, it may be observed 
that, in the arrangements of Providence, many ends 
are often accomplished by one thing, and that, in 
ascertaining what that one thing is intended for, we 
must take in all the ends which are actually se- 
cured by it. Thus, if we should ask what is the 
purpose for which light was created, We should 
greatly err, and should obtain but a very imperfect 
view of the objects contemplated by its creation, if 
we should fix our attention on seeirig and should 
infer that that was the only thing contemplated by 
it. Important as that is, and undeniable as it is that 
that was an important end contemplated in the for- 
mation of light, yet there are numerous other ends 
known to us, and perhaps many which are unknown, 
that were equally contemplated in its creation. It 
is the origin of colours everywhere ; it is somehow 
identified with warmth as it comes from the great 
source of light ; it is indispensable in the develop- 
ment of seeds and plants ; it exerts an important 
influence on the growth of animals ; it becomes a 
guide to the mariner in crossing the ocean ; it dif- 
fuses health and vigor over the world. If, then, we 
were asked what purposes light accomplishes in the 
universe, we should greatly err if we supposed that 
the whole answer would be comprised in saying that 
it is for the purpose of seeing. "We have given a 
correct answer so far as it goes ; but we have em- 
braced in it but a small part of the real purposes for 
which light was made. The same principles would 
be found, perhaps, to run through all the works of 



240 THE ATONEMENT. 

God, — that he accomplishes many purposes by each 
one of the things which he has made, and that, 
although we may find a beautiful and wise adapta- 
tion to a particular end, we should not infer, there- 
fore, that that was the only end contemplated. A 
muscle, a bone, a nerve, a valve in an artery, a 
petal of a fiower, a leaf on a tree, a drop of rain 
or of dew, may each be adapted to perform many 
functions; and to understand why they were made 
it would be necessary to take in all that is actually 
accomplished by them. So it may be in regard to 
the atonement; and we may greatly err in supposing 
that one thing and no more was contemplated by it; 
perhaps in supposing that it referred to one world 
and no more. 

There are some preliminary questions which meet 
us here in reference to the atonement, and which 
enter vitally into the subject, — questions which a 
skeptic asks, and which a philosophic mind will ask. 
They are such as these : — Of what use can suffering 
be in such a case? How can this make it proper 
that God should show mercy when he could not other- 
wise do it ? And especially of what value in such a 
case is the death of a victim ? Can it be supposed 
that this would be pleasing to God, or make him 
any more disposed to show mercy than he would be 
if no life were offered ? 

These questions are natural, but they are, ifc must 
be confessed, not easily answered. If they could 
have been suggested beforehand, — that is, if we could 
place ourselves in the order of things back of any 
suffering, — probably we should say, as we would in 
regard to sin, that there could be no conceivable 



THE NATUKE OF THE ATONEMENT. 241 

ends to be accomplished by suffering which would 
make it proper that it should be permitted to come 
into the system. We should suppose that a holy 
and benevolent God would never allow either sin, 
suffering, or death to enter the universe. We should 
deem this so certain that no mere reasoning could 
convince us that this would ever occur. But if we 
place ourselves in advance of that position, and look 
at facts, we shall find that not only has suffering 
been allowed to come into the system, but that it 
has been made to act a very important part in de- 
veloping the Divine purposes. We should have 
said that God would not accomplish any of his pur- 
poses by suffering ; we find that, contrary to all these 
anticipations, he has accomplished many of his de- 
signs by means of it. 

Particularly the following things are true. 

(a.) Suffering as such acts an important part in 
the development of God's plans, in the destiny of 
individuals. I mean now not suffering as deserved 
or as punishment; suffering not directly in the line 
of an offence and as a regular and perceived conse- 
quence of guilt, but suffering outside of punishment ; 
suffering that cannot be regarded as punishment; 
suffering that comes upon those who cannot, in re- 
spect to an}^ conceivable reason for its infliction, be 
regarded as guilii/. Thus the sufferings which come 
upon us as the consequences of the errors or crimes 
of guilty parents ; those which are the result of our 
connections with others, though we are in no way 
blameworthy for their conduct ; those which descend 
from generation to generation as the fruit of the sin 
and folly of an ancestor; those which involve whole 

Q 21 



242 THE ATONEMENT. 

communities in woe as tlie result of the carelessness 
or sinfulness of some one occupying a place of trust 
or responsibility, — as the captain of a vessel, or the 
commander of an army, — show that there is a pur- 
pose contemplated by suffering outside of the proper 
notion of punishment, and as exercising an import- 
ant agency where no guilt, so far as that particular 
suffering is concerned, exists in those who are 
affected by it. 

(b.) A considerable part of the blessings which we 
enjoy in this Hfe comes to us through suffering. 
They are the direct result of what may in some sense 
be called sacrifices on our part ; that is, we have sacri- 
jiced ease and comfort, and given ourselves to weari- 
some toil, in order to procure those blessings ; and 
we should not have possessed them if we had not 
submitted to the sacrifice of time and ease and pre- 
sent happiness. The property that is gained by the 
laborious cultivation of the earth, by digging in 
mines, by perils on the ocean, by exposure in 
foreign and pestilential climes, comes to us as the 
result of such sacrifices and sufferings. But, besides 
this, not a small part of the most valuable and 
valued traits of our character is the fruit of suffering ; 
of the trials which we have experienced in early 
years ; of the sickness and bereavements which have 
been our lot ; of the disappointments that have come 
upon us in our plans of life. We should have sup- 
posed a ^priori that it would have been otherwise; 
that, if a benevolent God meant to bless us, he would 
do it without resorting to such a medium. But it 
has not been as we should have anticipated; and, if 
we could now detach from the sum-total of what 



THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 243 

goes to make up our character all that has come to 
us as the direct or indirect result of personal suffer- 
ing, we might be surprised to find how meagre in 
amount, and how inferior in quality, the remainder 
would be. 

(c.) Equally true is it that a very large part of the 
blessings which we enjoy has come to us as the re- 
sult of the sufferings of others. To the sufferings 
and sacrifices of the friends of liberty in all ages and 
lands we owe the liberty which we now enjoy; and 
all that has ever been endured in the camp or the 
field, all the ills of cold, and hunger, and peril, and 
fatigue that have marked the progress of liberty in 
the world, have contributed to secure and perpetuate 
that which we now enjoy. To the sufferings and 
sacrifices of others we owe the enjoyment of the 
rights of conscience ; the privilege of worshipping 
God with none to molest us; all the peace and con- 
eolation which religion imparts in a world of sadness 
and sorrow ; all the support which it gives on the 
bed of death. We owe it to the early Christian 
martyrs that religion survived in the times when 
imperial power sought to crush it; and all that has 
been endured under the Inquisition, or in the times 
of the Eeformation, has entered as an essential ele- 
ment into religious freedom now. Religion has 
made its way in the world in the midst of the fires 
of persecution ; and while it would seem that God 
might have imparted those blessings without the suf- 
ferings of martyrdom, and while it would have ap- 
peared probable that he would thus do it, still, as a 
matter of fact, there is not a blessing of religion 
which we enjoy which is not the fruit of the suffer- 



244 THE ATONEMENT. 

ings endured on the rack and at the stake. And 
since, as a great rule in the Divine administration, 
this is the way in which we receive blessings from 
the hand of God, it is manifest that there is some 
reason for making those blessings conditional on 
suffering, or in making this a great principle in the 
Divine method of dealing with man. In temporal 
matters, men do not complain of this arrangement ; 
and why should we not be willing to admit that 
there may be equal wisdom in the method by which 
the highest blessings of this world and the next shall 
be conferred on men ? We receive the blessings of 
liberty gratefully as the result of the toils and sacri- 
fices of patriots: why should we not thus receive 
the blessings of redemption? Patriots have been 
satisfied if by their sufferings they could secure the 
liberty of their country: why should we not suppose 
that the Redeemer would be * satisfied' (Isa. liii. 11) 
if by his sufferings he could redeem a fallen world ? 

With these preliminary remarks, I proceed to 
specify more particularly what the atonement is, or 
what are the ends which it is designed to ac- 
complish. 

(1.) The atonement is something substituted in the 'place 
of the penalty of the law, which will answer the same 
ends as the punishment of the offender himself would. 
It is instead of his punishment. It is something 
which will make it proper for a lawgiver to suspend 
or remit the literal execution of the penalty of the 
law, because the object or end of that penalty has 
been secured, or because something has been suhsti- 
tuted for that which will answer the same purpose. 
In other words, there are certain ends proposed by 



THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 245 

the appointment of a penalty in case of a violation 
of tlie law; and if these ends are secured, then the 
punishment may be remitted and the offender may 
be pardoned. That which will secure these ends is 
an atonement 

The thing aimed at — the result to be reached — is 
the remission of the penalty, or the manifestation of 
mercy to the guilty. It is not an abstract thing — a 
mere display of an attribute of the lawgiver — that is 
contemplated ; but it is a practical work, in the par- 
don of the guilty, and in placing him in a condition as 
if he had not violated the law. The essential reason 
why this is done, is that God is merciful ; the mani- 
fested reason is, that the same ends have been se- 
cured, so far as the design in the appointment of the 
penalty of the law is concerned, which would have 
been if the offender had been punished : in other 
words, mercy can now be manifested consistently with 
justice; for the act of pardon does not imply, by a 
fair construction, any disregard of the claims of jus- 
tice or of the real interests of the community. 

{a.) Mere mercy could be shown in any case ; but, 
as we have seen, there are insuperable difficulties in 
all governments in the exercise of pardon without 
an atonement. 

[h.) Mere justice could be shown by a rigid inflic- 
tion of the penalty of the law in all cases whatso- 
ever. It could be shown in a human government 
on earth ; it could be shown in the Divine govern- 
ment in hell, — for God could consign every violator 
of his laws, under the most exact administration of 
justice, to the woes which sin deserves. But then, 
as we have seen, this would be attended with nume- 

21* 



246 THE ATONEMENT. ' 

rous evils. It would impinge on the finer feelings 
of our nature. It would make a government harsh, 
Bevere, tyrannical, — an administration to be feared, 
not to be loved. It would violate principles which 
have been implanted by the Creator himself within 
us; for there is an arrangement in our constitution 
which shows that it was contemplated that mercy 
should enter largely into the course of things in the 
universe, and that the government of the universe 
should not be the exercise of mere stern, inexorable 
law. 

The object of the atonement is the blending of the 
two. It is an arrangement by which one shall not 
be exercised at the expense of the other. In the 
ordinary course of things, and as aftairs are actually 
administered among men, the two do not harmonize. 
One is sacrificed to the other. If mere justice is 
displayed, there is no mercy; if mere mercy, justice 
is sacrificed. 

The atonement is an arrangement by which both 
may be manifested in reference to the case of the 
same individual, so that, while he is treated as if he 
had not sinned, there is no disregard of the claims 
of justice. Instead of exhibiting the attribute of 
stern justice in one case, thus disregarding all the laws 
of our nature which have been arranged with a view 
to the exercise of mercy, and of exhibiting the 
attribute of mercy in another, thus disregarding in like 
manner the laws of our nature which demand that 
justice should be done, the two meet together in 
reference to the same individual, or to any number 
of individuals who may be willing to accept of salva- 
tion at the hands of God. 



THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 247 

The means by which this is proposed to be accom- 
plished is by substitution: substitution in two senses, — 
(a) in the fact that the undeserved and voluntary 
sufferings of one are in the place of the deserved 
suffering of another, and {h) in the nature of the suf- 
ferings endured ; that his sufferings shall not be the 
same in kind or degree which the sufferings of the 
guilty themselves would have been, but shall be of 
such a nature as to be a proper equivalent for them, 
or shall, in the circumstances of the case, answer the 
same ends which w^ould have been accomplished by 
those sufferings. 

The question now to be considered is, whether there 
can he a substitution which will secure these ends. This 
question involves the whole doctrine of the atone- 
ment, and the views which are entertained of the 
atonement will depend on the answer that shall be 
given to it. In relation to this question there are 
two inquiries, which must determine the whole 
matter: — Is such a substitution admissible? If ad- 
missible, would it answer the same purpose as the 
punishment of the guilty ? 

[a.) Is such a substitution admissible? That is, 
Can it be proper, in the administration of a govern- 
ment of law, to admit the principle that one who is 
innocent may suffer for the guilty, or that his suffer- 
ings may be substituted in the place of those due to 
the transgressor himself? The inquiry is not whether 
an innocent being may be compelled to suffer in the 
place of the guilty, or whether the punishment due 
to crime may be transferred from the guilty to the 
innocent, by the will of the lawgiver; for no one 
could defend either of these points. But the ques- 



248 THE ATONEMENT. 

tion is, whether, in a case of proposed voluntary sub- 
stitution, it is an admissible principle. 

And here the following observations may be 
made. 

1. It is an admitted principle in pecuniary trans- 
actions ; for example, in the payment of a debt or 
fine. The law requires only that the debt or the 
fine shall be paid, and is wholly indifferent by whom 
it is done, — whether by the debtor himself or by a 
friend who chooses to pay it for him. In fact, the 
law makes numerous arrangements of this very 
nature, as in the case of 'bail,' and in 'securities' 
for the faithful performance of the duties of an office, 
even requiring that such bail and such securities 
shall be given by others, and exacting the forfeit- 
ure of him who becomes voluntary 'bail' or 'se- 
curity.' 

2. The principle is admitted in case of a hostage. 
A hostage is " a person delivered to an enemy or 
hostile power, as a pledge to secure the performance 
of the conditions of a treaty or stipulations of any 
kind, and on the performance of which the person 
is to be released." — Webster. The person who be- 
comes a hostage is substituted in the place of the 
state that makes the treaty or stipulation, — since the 
whole state could not be made over for security, but 
the hostage who is made over is, in respect to rank 
or position, of so much value to the state that he 
becomes a guarantee that the contracting party will 
faithfully perform the conditions of the treaty. If 
he is a voluntary hostage, the act is an expression 
of his conviction that the state will perform the con- 
ditions of the treaty ; and by whatever there is of 



THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 249 

worth or dignity in his own rank and character, his 
becoming a hostage is of the nature of a pledge that 
it will do it. And in proportion to his dignity and 
worth he becomes a security that the treaty or stipu- 
lation will be executed ; that is, the state will sooner 
execute the conditions than suffer any evil to befall 
him. If, however, the conditions of the treaty are 
not complied with, it is understood, and, indeed, is a 
part of the arrangement, that his life or liberty is 
forfeited. Such a forfeit would be, in fact, in the 
place of the punishment which might be inflicted on 
the state for its violation of the compact ; and his 
sufferings, whatever they are, are a subsiiiiition , for 
the punishment admitted to be due to the state 
itself, or which the injured party might justly bring 
upon the party that had violated the treaty. Thus, 
in the Roman history, Regulus, who had been de- 
livered to the Carthaginians as a hostage, after 
being sent to Rome to persuade the Roman Senate 
to a certain course, under a pledge that if they would 
not do it he would return and die, and after having 
himself advised the Senate not to comply with the 
conditions proposed by the Carthaginians, volunta- 
rily returned to Carthage and was put to death 
under the severest form of torture, — his sufferings 
and death being, in fact, suhsiituted in the place of the 
vengeance which the Carthaginians would have 
wreaked upon Rome itself, if it could, as an expres- 
sion of the sense entertained of the wrong which 
Rome had done. 

3. As far as it will answer the end, or as far as it 
can be done, it seems to be a principle on which 
men do not hesitate to act, or where they do not 



250 THE ATONEMENT. 

pause to inquire or not whether it is a principle that 
may be admitted, that one may take the place of 
another and be treated as he would be. Thus in 
the cases above alluded to, in a pecuniary transaction 
and of a hostage. So, too, in a case of drafting or 
conscription in an army. In such a case, all the re- 
quirements are met if one who is equally able-bodied, 
and otherwise equally well qualified for military 
service, becomes a substitute in the place of him 
who had been drafted into the service or who is 
called into it under the requirements of a conscrip- 
tion. There is no principle of military law which 
would forbid such a substitution, if voluntary; for 
all the demands of the law would be substantially 
complied with ; that is, all the purposes contem- 
plated by drafting or conscription would be secured. 
Thus, too, men do not suppose that there is any 
violation of a just principle in offering to become a 
substitute, or in offering to bear the effects of a cer- 
tain course of conduct in their own persons. For 
example, in the history of Joseph, when Simeon had 
been retained as a hostage for the return of his 
brethren, and when Joseph had required that, as a 
proof that they were true men and not spies, their 
younger brother should be brought down to Egypt, 
and the aged Jacob hesitated about sending his 
younger son down with them, Judah plead with his 
father, and said, "■ Slay my two sons, if I bring him 
not to thee : deliver him into my hand, and I will 
bring him to thee again." (Gen. xlii. 37.) And so 
again he said, "I will be surety for him : of my hand 
shalt thou require him. If I bring him not unto thee 
and set him before thee, then let me hear the blame 



THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 251 

forever.'' (Gen. xliii. 9.) Here there was felt to be 
no impropriety in the princijole of substitution. Ju- 
dah did not suppose that it was in any way improper 
to propose it; the aged father did not object to it 
when it was proposed. The proposition was made 
as a pledge for the welfare of the favourite son; as 
committing Judah to his safe return ; as a gua- 
rantee that all would be well ; as expressing a will- 
ingness on his part that even his own two sons should 
be slain if he did not bring back Benjamin to his 
father; and as an expression of his own willingness 
to bear the blame in the case forever, — that is, to 
take upon himself all the consequences. The re- 
mark here is, that men act spontaneously on the 
principle involved in the doctrine of substitution, 
and that it is so much a matter of impulse, and 
spontaneity, and conscious propriety, that they do 
not even pause to consider whether it is or is not 
proper. In other words, there is something in human 
nature which lays the foundation for the propriety 
of the principle and leads men at once to act on it in all 
cases when it can be done. The notion of becom- 
ing a surety, a hostage, a pledge, by substituted toil, 
by suffering, or by a fine, — by devoting whatever 
there is in character, position, or influence as a 
security for another, — by bearing the sufferings or 
privations involved in a case of substitution, — or by 
voluntarily assuming the consequences of a certain 
course of conduct^ as in the proposed case of Judah 
and the actual case of Eegulus, — is one on which 
men act spontaneously and constantly. 

4. If, therefore, a substitute would answer the 
end in any given case, it would seem to be a prin- 



252 THE ATONEMENT. 

ciple that might be admitted to any extent whatever. 
If the sufferings which one might endure voluntarily 
in the place of another would, in fact, answer the 
same end which they would if inflicted on an of- 
fender himself, it is difficult to see why the principle 
might not be admitted in such a case as well as in 
the case of the payment of a debt, of ' bail,' of ' secu- 
rity' for the proper fulfilment of the duties of an 
office, of a drafted soldier, of a hostage, or in those 
instances in which men spontaneously take upon 
themselves the consequences of a certain course of 
conduct, or are willing that the ' blame' should fall 
upon themselves. 

b. If the principle is admissible, the next question 
is whether a substitution in the place of the guilty 
call be made to answer the same ends which would 
be secured by the punishment of the guilty them- 
selves. This question is now to be asked in view 
of the objects to be accomplished in the administra- 
tion of law, or the ends contemplated in the penalty 
of the law. It is equivalent to asking whether as 
deep an impression can be produced of the value of 
law^ and of the evils of the violation of the law, by 
such substituted suflferings as would be produced by 
the infliction of the penalty on the guilty ; whether 
as much can be accomplished in securing the refor- 
mation and future good conduct of the offender; 
Tvhether as much can be secured in deterring others 
from violating the law; and whether as much can be 
effected in securing the, peace and good order of a 
community. In all the cases which have been re- 
ferred to where the principle of substitution is ad- 
mitted, it is obvious that the same ends are secured 



THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 253 

by the substitution, which would be by the regular 
operations of the law. The question now is whether 
the same result can be secured by the substituted 
sufferings of the innocent in the place of the punish- 
ment of a violator of the laws of God. 

(1.) If a sinner is punished in the world of woe, 
he will suffer there by enduring the penalty of the 
law; that is, as has been explained, his sufferings 
will be designed to show the sense entertained by 
God of the value of the law and the evil of violating 
it. Those sufferings must also, so far as that may 
operate at all in producing such an effect, be in- 
tended to deter others from disobedience by the cer- 
tainty that punishment will follow disobedience, and 
by the intensity and duration of the punishment. 
These would be the effects in an individual case; 
they would be the results in any number of cases, 
in the aggregate of woe endured by the lost. And 
the effect would stop there. Those sufferings would 
not be designed to reform the offender himself or 
any of his suffering companions ; for, apart from the 
consideration already urged that this is not, in any 
case, the proper end or result of punishment, it is 
clear that that could not be its design in a form of 
punishment that was to be eternal. The end to be 
reached, then, by substituted sufferings would be a 
representation of the sense entertained of the value 
of law and the evil of violating the law equal to that 
which would be produced if the punishment were 
inflicted on the guilty themselves. 

(2.) If a sinner bears the penalty of the law him- 
self, the impression produced on the universe at 
large by his individual sufferings will be, at any one 

22 



254 THE ATONEMENT. 

time, or even in the continuousness of his suflerings, 
a slight impression. If lost, he becomes, in fact, 
lost in more senses than one, — lost not only to hap- 
piness and hope, but lost in the sense that his name 
is forgotten and that his individual sufferings are 
unknown to the universe at large. An impression 
may be indeed made by the aggregate of woe endured 
by all the lost ; but the name of the individual suf- 
ferer will be unknown, and, sunk in the vast host, 
his particular sorrows will have no such conspicuity 
as to make any impression on the universe at large. 
Of all the inmates of the penitentiaries in this land, 
it is a rare thing that the sufferings of an individual 
make any impression on the community, or that he 
contributes in any more than the slightest possible 
degree to keep up the impression of the value of the 
law and of the evil of violating it. After the in- 
terest excited by the trial is over and he is consigned 
to his cell, the case ceases to attract public in- 
terest. The name and memory of the convict soon 
die away from the recollection of mankind; and 
whether he suffers little or much, provided the exact 
sentence of the law be adhered to, excites no interest 
in the world at large. He soon loses the melancholy 
conspicuity which he attracted by the commission 
of the crime and by the process of trial, and is for- 
gotten ; for all that ever created an interest in his 
case, and all that ever gave him conspicuity, has 
been accomplished in arresting him and consigning 
him to deserved punishment. Unable any longer to 
awaken an interest in the bosoms of his fellow- 
men, he drags out in solitude and neglect the weary 
years of his confinement, having sunk to that ob- 



THE NATURE OP THE ATONEMENT. 255 

scurity from which he was elevated temporarily by 
the commission of the crime. An impression may 
indeed be made in a community by a knowledge of 
the fact that there is a penitentiary, and that there 
are guilty men incarcerated there; but the sufferings 
of the individual attract no attention and make no 
impression. From the nature of the case, will it not 
be so in regard to the sufferers in the world of woe ? 
(3.) But what has now been stated would not oc- 
cur in reference to the substitute in the atonement. 
If it be a part of the doctrine of the atonement, and 
essential to that doctrine, that the Redeemer was 
Divine, that he was " God manifest in the flesh," 
that there was in a proper sense an incarnation of 
the Deity, then it is clear that such an incarnation, 
and the sufferings of such an one on a cross, were 
events adapted to make an impression on the uni- 
verse at large deeper by far than would be done by 
the sufferings of the guilty themselves, though those 
sufferings should involve sorrow — the sorrow of 
remorse — which the innocent one could not expe- 
rience, and though they should be prolonged to a 
far more extended duration. If it should be sup- 
posed that the heir-apparent to a crown could take 
the place of any number of rebellious subjects and 
endure in their place the suffering appointed for 
rebels and traitors, though it might be true that his 
individual sorrows might not equal the amount of 
the aggregate sorrows of all who would otherwise 
have died, and though it should be admitted that 
there would be an element in their sufferings which 
would not enter into his, — the element of remorse, — 
it would nevertheless be true that a deeper impres- 



256 THE ATONEMENT. 

sion would be made by Ms public execution than 
would be by the sufferings of the offenders them- 
selves. That impression would be produced not 
only by the unusual character of the transaction, but 
by the manifest fact that the crime was regarded as 
of a nature so serious as to require such an expia- 
tion, and by the purpose manifested by the sove- 
reign to maintain inflexibly the authority of the 
law. All eyes would be turned towards the illus- 
trious sufferer ; all hearts would be filled with com- 
passion; all business would be suspended in the 
contemplation of the amazing scene ; all men would 
feel that there was an unspeakable majesty in the 
law and an unspeakable importance in maintaining 
its authority ; all would be made sensible that that 
must be a vast evil which made it necessary that 
such sufferings should be endured by one of so 
exalted a rank. And if on such an occasion the 
sovereign himself should adopt some unusual and 
impressive measures to bear testimony to the dignity 
and moral worth of the sufferer, and to show the 
estimate which he put on the benevolence which the 
voluntary sufferer manifested in being willing to 
endure these sorrows in behalf of others, all would 
feel that such a manifestation would be appropriate, 
as all must feel that it was appropriate that the Eternal 
Father should command the sun to withdraw his 
beams, and the earth to tremble, and the rocks to 
rend — to spread a universal pall over the world — 
when his Son expired on the cross. 

I have said that the individual sufferer sinking 
down into the common and undistinguished abyss 
of woes might be forgotten, and that his name and 



THE NATUKE OF THE ATONEMENT. 257 

his sufi'erings might never be known to the universe 
at large. ]N"ot so, however, with Him who took his 
place and died in his stead, — the Son of God. His 
cross became for the time the centre of observation 
in the universe. He had descended from heaven 
and had taken upon himself the form of a man. He 
had subjected himself voluntarily to poverty, shame, 
and contempt; he had been bound, and scourged, 
and publicly rejected; he had submitted to a mock 
trial and to an unjust condemnation ; he had borne his 
own cross to the place of crucifixion, and had volun- 
tarily given himself up to be put to death in a form 
that involved the keenest torture that men could in- 
flict. Rejected of men, and apparently forsaken of 
God, he had taken upon himself the "burden of the 
world's atonement." If that scene actually occurred, 
then angels and distant worlds must have felt an 
interest in it which they could not feel in the suf- 
ferings of the guilty themselves. If he died to show 
by these sufferings the value of the law and the 
evil of disobedience, then no sufferings of the guilty 
themselves could make so deep an impression on 
angelic minds and on distant worlds as the substi- 
tuted and voluntary sorrows of the Son of God. 

If now an objector should recur to a question 
already suggested, and ask, "What after all, is the 
value of such sufferings? what is their exact bearing? 
why might not the same ends have been secured 
without suffering? and how can it be supposed that 
these sufferings would contribute to secure the 
favour of God ? it may be asked, in reply. What is 
the bearing of suffering at all? What, in. any case, 
is its exact value? How does it contribute to 

R 22* 



258 THE ATONEMENT. 

secure the favour of God? How does it avail in 
leading men to penitence and in preparing for 
usefulness and heaven? How do the sufterings 
of patriots contribute to procure the Divine favour 
in the bestowment of liberty? What bearing can 
they have on God? What can they do to incline 
him to impart his favour? Why should he not 
bestow the same favour without the suffering? 
Yet they do secure blessings from God; for, as 
has been already observed, a large part of the 
blessings which we enjoy can be traced to the in- 
strumentality of suffering, and if the suffering had 
not been endured, so far as now appears, the favour 
would not have been conferred. Perhaps it may yet 
be found to be true that the principle which would 
explain this fact, and show the connection, in any 
case, between suffering and the Divine favour, might 
explain all the essential principles and remove all 
the material difficulties in the doctrine of the atone- 
ment. If I have, in fact, received blessings from 
God through the sufferings of patriots and friends 
which I should not otherwise have received, it seems 
difficult to see why we may not advance with the 
same principle to the higher subjects of redemption, 
and why it may not follow that voluntary substi- 
tuted sufferings ma}^ in some way secure the blessings 
of a higher life. If the sufferings of friends may 
have operated to remove obstacles out of the way so 
that valuable temporal mercies have been imparted 
to me, and if the sufferings of patriots have re- 
moved obstacles out of the way so that the blessings 
of liberty have been bestowed upon me, it seems 
difficult to see why the sufferings of the Eedeemer 



THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 259 

may notj in a higher sense, remove obstacles out 
of the way so that the blessings of salvation may be 
now bestowed upon me. 

(2.) The atonement secures reconciliation between God 
and man. 

This is, indeed, the proper meaning of the word 
atonement — at-one-ment, or the being at one — as used 
in our language; and this idea is perhaps always 
suggested when the term is used, even when it is 
employed in its most strict theological sense, or 
when it is employed strictly to denote the means by 
which reconciliation is effected. There occurs to 
the mind at once the idea of parties at variance; 
and then the idea of some means to satisfy the party 
that has been wronged; and then the idea of recon- 
ciliation or harmony effected. The point now to be 
illustrated is that the atonement is of such a nature 
as to secure reconciliation between God and man ; 
that is, to do whatever is necessary to remove the 
obstacles to reconciliation and to secure actual har- 
mony and friendship. 

In illustrating this point, the following remarks 
may be made. 

a. Nothing is more difficult than the task of recon- 
ciling opposing minds. This is seen in the attempt 
to reconcile individuals who have become alienated 
from each other in a family or in a neighbourhood, 
or among those who have been formerly friends ; in 
the attempts to produce peace and harmony where 
parties carry their grievances before courts of jus- 
tice, when, though the mere pecuniary part of the diffi- 
culty may be adjusted, the alienation of mind and 
heart is often entirely unaffected ; and in the attempts 



260 THE ATONEMENT. 

to restore peace between nations at war. This diffi- 
culty is often increased by pride and prejudice : it ia 
augmented if the imagination has magnified the dif- 
ficulty ; if friends on either side have become en- 
listed in the strife; if the controversy has been long 
continued; if the causes of the difficulty have 
been accumulating for years ; if it relates to many 
points at issue ; if the parties have become openly 
committed to a claim that is set up, or if their be- 
coming reconciled will be construed as yielding a 
point of honour; and the difficulty is not the less 
if only one party — as is often the case — is in the 
wrong, and if the other not only has done no wrong 
but is willing now even to make sacrifices for the 
sake of peace. Hence it is that there is no office 
more difficult, and commonly more thankless, than 
that of a mediator; that there is no man to whom 
we are less disposed to listen than to him who un- 
dertakes to convince us that we are wrong in such a 
controversy, and who endeavours to induce us to 
abandon a position which we have tenaciously or 
obstinately held, and who would persuade us to be 
at peace with one from whom we have been long 
estranged. 

h. There is an alienation between God and man ; 
and this is the foundation of all the evil that has 
come upon the race. It is everywhere in the 
Bible charged on man that he is estranged from 
his Maker; and it is everywhere affirmed that 
God cannot be at peace w^ith men unless some- 
thing shall be done that shall remove the cause of 
alienation. 

1. On the part of man, nothing is more apparent 



THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 261 

than the fact of his alienation from God. The his- 
tory of the world proves it. God is not loved. His 
law is not obeyed. His arrangements are not sub- 
mitted to. His government is regarded as harsh, 
severe, unequal, unjust. There is in the human 
soul a foundation of estrangement from God lying 
back of the Divine dealings towards the race, — an op- 
position to his character and claims antecedent to any 
thing that he does to call forth the feelings of the 
soul ; and this becomes manifest when the Divine 
law is laid across the path of men and the claims 
of that law come in collision with the feelings and 
purposes of the soul. This opposition to God is 
one of the earliest conscious feelings of our nature, 
and it is fostered and sustained by all the pride of 
the human heart, by all its impatience of control, 
by all its cherished plans as they are developed in 
life, by all the passions which are engendered in 
carrying out our chosen schemes, and by the fact 
that in those schemes we become committed before 
the world. ITothing is more manifest than the fact 
that such an alienation exists on the part of man 
towards his Maker; nothing is more difficult than 
to overcome this and to make man willing to be at 
peace with God. 

2. Equally manifest is it that there is on the part 
of God an alienation or estrangement from man. 
This is clear from the Divine dealings towards the 
race. Man is not treated as if there was peace betiveen 
him and his Maker. The Divine dealings towards 
the race are not such as they would be on the sup- 
position that God is pleased with human conduct. 
Man is not dealt with as we must suppose unfallen 



262 THE ATONEMENT. 

angels are, or as he himself would have been if he 
had not fallen. We can find, indeed, in the Divine 
dealings, abundant proofs of the goodness of God; 
we can see evidence that he is willing to be at peace 
with the race and that he is ready to forgive sin ; 
we can easily demonstrate that there are and have 
been prospective arrangements for his becoming re- 
conciled to man ; but we look in vain for the evidence 
that that peace already exists. There is even in the 
bosom of the guilty themselves — in their sense of 
guilt, in the feeling of remorse, in the apprehension 
of the wrath of God, in the pre-intimations in the 
soul of a coming judgment — much which maybe re- 
garded as designed to be a proof of the fact of such 
an alienation on the part of God, as it certainly is 
of an alienation on the part of man ; and we may see 
abundant evidence of such an alienation on the part 
of God in his dealings. All the calamities which 
come upon individuals or nations as the efiect of 
sin ; all the arrangements in the human constitution 
for the infliction of suffering as the result of a cer- 
tain course of conduct; all the forms of disease that 
invade the human frame and sweep off the living to 
their graves, are so many proofs that God regards 
the race as guilty and that there is an estrangement 
between himself and man. Such things are not 
tokens of friendship and favour. They are not 
direct proofs of love. They would not occur in a 
just and benevolent administration unless there was 
a foundation in the conduct and character of man 
for the Divine displeasure. 

c. The atonement removes the obstacles to recon- 



THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 263 

ciliation alike on the part of God and on the part 
of man. 

1. On the part of God. The obstacles to recon- 
ciliation on his part did not arise from any unwilling- 
ness to be at peace with man ; from any want of a 
benevolent regard to his welfare; from any enmity 
in his own feelings towards the race as such ; from 
the causes which often produce and perpetuate 
alienations among men; but solely from the fact that 
he is the Lawgiver of the universe, and that his law 
has been violated ; from the fact that the law^ has a 
just penalty, threatening death to the violator ; from 
the fact that the perfections of God required that 
his declared views of the evil of sin should be con- 
sistently carried out before the universe ; from the 
fact that if the transgressor was released from the 
penalty of the law there would seem to be a total 
disregard of the law and its threatenings ; from the 
fact that, if the sinner was admitted to the favour 
conferred on those who had not sinned, it would 
seem as if God was regardless of character and treated 
the good and the bad alike ; and from the fact that 
such treatment would seem to set aside all the re- 
straints of the law, and abolish all the boundaries 
between right and wrong, and destroy all the secu- 
rities set up to secure the interests of justice. 

In the idea of the atonement it is supposed that 
these difficulties have been removed, and that God 
is in all respects now as free to bestow his favour on 
those for whom it was made as he is on those who 
have never violated his law. It is clear that this 
must be so if it be true that as much has been done 
by the substituted sufferings of the Redeemer to 



264 THE ATONEMENT. 

show regard for the law as would have been by the 
sufferings of the guilty themselves if they had borne 
the penalty. If all has been accomplished by those 
substituted sufferings which would have been ac- 
complished had the penalty of the law been inflicted 
on the offenders, nothing can be plainer than that 
the guilty, so far as this point is concerned, may be 
released, or that pardon may properly be granted to 
them. If a debt has been paid, and all the ends of 
justice contemplated in the obligation to pay a debt 
are secured, the debtor is discharged of course ; if 
another is willing to become security for the pay- 
ment of the debt and will hold himself liable to it, 
and he to whom the debt is due is willing to accept 
the security, the debtor may in that instance also 
be discharged. 

In the atonement it is supposed that Christ has 
done as much to maintain the honour of the law as 
would have been done had it been personally obeyed 
by all who will be saved by him ; that he has done 
as much to maintain that honour as would have been 
done had its penalty been literally borne by all for 
whom he died ; that he has done as much to deter 
others from violating that law as would have been 
done by the infliction of the penalty on the offenders 
themselves ; that he has done as much to show the 
sense entertained by God of the evil of sin as would 
have been done had the fearful consequences of sin 
come upon the guilty themselves. If all this was 
done, then it is clear that there would be no obstacle 
on the part of God to reconciliation with those who 
had violated the law. 

2. The atonement removes the obstacles to recon- 



THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 265 

ciliation on tlie part of man. Those obstacles do not 
arise from any reference in his conduct to the 
interests of the universe; but they arise solely 
from the love of sin and the unwillingness of 
man to be reconciled to his Maker. The object to 
be accomplished, so far as man is concerned, is to 
bring him to a willingness to be at peace with God 
and to accept of pardon and salvation on the terms 
proposed. The question is whether there can be in- 
troduced into the work of the atonement such an 
influence as will overcome the unwillingness of the 
sinner to be at peace with God. 

We have seen that in human administrations 
of law one great difficulty in the way of pardon is 
that there is no security for the reformation and 
future good conduct of him who is pardoned, but 
that, if an influence could be connected with the 
instrument of pardon which would secure this, the 
difficulty would be removed. This is contemplated 
in the atonement. It is an essential idea in its 
nature that it will secure this effect, — that in the 
gift of a Saviour, in his character, in the manifes- 
tations of his love, and in his sufferings in behalf 
of others, there is that which will secure repentance 
and reformation on the part of the sinner. By the 
greatness of the sufferings of him who made it, the 
atonement is adapted to convince the sinner of the 
evil of those sins for which he died ; by the mani- 
festation of love, it is adapted to make an appeal 
to the gratitude of man; by the fact that those 
sufferings were endured in our behalf, it is fitted 
most deeply to appeal to the hearts of the guilty. 
"We are always more deeply affected with the suf- 

23 



266 THE ATONEMENT. 

ferings of the innocent than with the sufferings of 
the guilty. The guilty we feel ought to suffer, and 
our judgments approve of the punishment if it be 
not be3'0nd the desert of the offender. The feeling 
of compassion is checked and bounded by the fact 
that what is endured is deserved. We are deeply 
affected by the sufferings of others if they are the 
consequences of our own offences. A young man 
might care very little about the calamities that 
would come upon himself as the consequence of a 
career of folly and dissipation, while he might be 
deeply affected at the suffering which he has brought 
upon a sister or a mother. When all else is in- 
effectual in recovering an intemperate man from his 
course of life, — when his own disgrace and suffering 
fail to lead him to reformation, — there is still one 
source of appeal that may be effectual. The suffer- 
ings of his wife and children may still be appealed 
to, with the hope that his heart may be touched with 
a sense of the calamities which he is bringing upon 
others, though insensible to the woes which he 
brings upon himself. So, also, in a penitentiary, as 
has been intimated before, there is no hope of the 
permanent reformation of an offender from the mere 
infliction of punishment. Probably a case has never 
occurred in which the darkness of a dungeon, seve- 
rity of labour, starvation, chains and stripes, have 
melted the heart of an offender and brought him to 
repentance. So well is this now understood that 
the only hope of securing repentance and reforma- 
tion in a prison is from a side-influence, — an influence 
that goes forth from sympathy and compassion ; not 
from the turnkey, but from the heart of some 



THE NATURE OP THE ATONEMENT. 267 

Howard, who comes to show the prisoner that he 
has another purpose than that of riveting more 
closely his chains. It is not law that reforms : 
it is love, compassion, kindness. In accordance 
with this view, it is a fact that the reformation of the 
world has been accomplished, as far as it has been 
accomplished at all, not by judgment and wrath, 
but by the gospel of Christ. The great instrument 
in bringing men to repentance and securing their 
reformation has been the story of the Redeemer's 
sufferings. Floods, flames, wars, earthquakes, the 
plague, the pestilence, have done little to reform the 
guilty. The human heart grows hard under the in- 
fliction of judgment ; and though punishment may 
restrain the guilty and awaken them to reflection, it 
does not convince and convert. Crimes are multi- 
plied even in the ragings of the pestilence, and men 
abandon themselves to licentiousness and to corrup- 
tion when the plague is sweeping away its thousands 
of victims.* It has been, in fact, the manifestation 

* Thus, Thucydides, in his celebrated description of the plague at 
Athens, says, " The plague was the origin of lawless conduct in the 
city to a greater extent [than it had before existed]. For deeds 
which formerly men hid from view, so as not to do them just as they 
pleased, they now more readily ventured on; since they saw the 
change so sudden in the case of those who were prosperous and 
quickly perished, and of those who before had had nothing and at 
once came into possession of the property of the dead. So they re- 
solved to take their enjoyment quickly and with a sole view to gra- 
tification, regarding their lives and their riches alike as things of a 
day. As for taking trouble about what was thought honourable, no 
one was forward to do it, — deeming it uncertain whether before he 
had attained to it he would not be cut off ; but every thing that was 
immediately pleasant, and that which was conducive to it by any 
means whatever,- — this was laid down to be both honourable and ex- 



268 THE ATONEME^'T. 

of mercy that has been made the means of melting 
the hearts of men and of turning them to God. 

d. Eeconciliation is in fact produced between God 
and man by the atonement. God becomes the friend 
of the pardoned sinner. He admits him to his 
favour and treats him as a friend. The sinner he- 
comes the friend of God. He changes his view of 
the character of God; he submits to his arrange- 
ments ; he no longer opposes his plans ; he is pleased 
with his government and his laws. He loves him 
as he loves no other being. He lives to promote his 
glory. He loves what God approves, defends what 
he has stated to be true, advocates the plans which 
he has formed, vindicates the doctrine which he 
has revealed, trusts in trial to the promises which 
he has made, flies to him in times of trouble and 
sorrow, leans upon his arm in death, finds in the 
mortal agony his highest consolation in the belief 
that God is his friend, and expects to find felicity in 
the future world only in God. There is no friend- 
ship so strong, so sincere, so tender, so enduring, as 
that between God and the reconciled sinner; and no 
work ever undertaken is so complete as that by 
which the reconciliation of God and man has been 
sought. It survives all changes through which man 

pedient. And fear of gods or law of men there was none to stop 
them; for with regard to the former they esteemed it all the same 
whether' they worshipped them or not, from seeing all alike perish- 
ing; and with regard to their offences (against the latter) no one 
expected to live till judgment should be passed on him, and so to pay 
the penalty of them ; but they thought a far heavier sentence was 
impending in that which had already been passed upon them; and 
that before it fell on them it was right to have some enjoyment of 
\xfQ.^^ -'-History of the Peloponnesian War, ii. 53. 



THE NATURE OE THE ATONEMENT. 269 

passes here ; it is confirmed in death, and will exist 
forever. 

(3.) The atonement may be an important means 
of sustaining the Divine government, and may thus 
have an important bearing on other worlds. 

This is a point, indeed, on which we cannot argue 
with much certainty; for it lies at present beyond 
the sphere of our observation. But there are some 
things which may render it not improbable that 
there may be bearings of the atonement on other 
worlds which are now very imperfectly understood 
by us, and which must be in a great measure hidden 
until we are admitted to the revelations of the future 
state. In such passages of Scripture as the follow- 
ing it seems to be implied that the work of the Re- 
deemer may have an important bearing on other 
parts of the universe, and may furnish to other 
worlds an illustration of the character of God 
which could be obtained from no other source. 
^' Which things the angels desire to look into." (1 
Peter i. 12.) "And to make all men see what is 
the fellowship of this mystery, which from the be- 
ginning of the world hath been hid in God, who 
created all things by Jesus Christ ; to the intent that 
now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly 
places might be known by the church the manifold 
wisdom of God, according to the eternal purpose 
which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord." (Eph. 
iii. 9, 10, 11.) "For it pleased the Father that in 
him should all fulness dwell, and, having made 
peace through the blood of his cross, by him to re- 
concile all things unto himself; by him, I say, 
whether they be things in earth, or things in 

23* 



270 THE ATONEMENT. 

lieaven." (Col. i. 19, 20.) The same idea may be ex- 
pressed also in Eph. i. 10 : — "That in the dispensa- 
tion of the fulness of times he might gather together 
in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven 
and which are on earth." 

It is not to be supposed that we could fully com- 
prehend all the bearings of the work of the atone- 
ment on other worlds, or the grounds of the inte- 
rest which angelic beings are represented as takiug 
in tho incarnation of the Son of God; but even 
with our imperfect and limited vision we can 
see that there must be important reasons why the 
inhabitants of other worlds should feel an interest 
in the redemption of a lost world. 

{a.) The revolt of a world is an event which must 
attract attention. I^othing gives more conspicuity 
than crime. A man before insignificant and un- 
known becomes at once exalted into notoriety by 
becoming a murderer ; a commander of a vessel at 
sea who would have been otherwise undistinguished 
attracts the attention of nations by becoming a 
pirate ; an officer in an army who would have been 
soon forgotten in performing the common duties of 
his station sends down his name to future times by 
becoming a traitor; a world that might have been 
undistinguished may become known to all the hosts 
of worlds by a revolt from the government of the 
Creator. The earth, therefore, though among the 
least of the worlds which God has made, may be 
among those most distinguished ; for it is the theatre 
of revolt from the government of God, and is illus- 
trating in scenes of sorrow the ej^ect of a violation 
of the Divine laws. 



THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 271 

(b.) The question whether a race of rebels could 
be pardoned would be one that w^ould be of interest 
to distant worlds. In illustration of this, we may 
assume the truth of the statement in the Bible that 
one other order of beings has fallen, and that the 
sentence of the broken law was executed upon them 
with no arrangements made for pardon. If we sup- 
pose that the fallen angels have been left in their 
state of rebellion wdth no provision made for their 
recovery; if we suppose that their revolt made it 
certain that they would never be restored to favour; 
if we suppose that there were no incipient and per- 
ceived arrangements made for their restoration; if 
we suppose that this had continued for a period 
which would constitute ages as we measure duration, 
and if we suppose that a new revolt, under their in- 
fluence, should break out in a new world and under 
circumstances materially different from the former 
revolt, it would be too much to infer that the ques- 
tion about the pardon of revolted subjects of the 
Almighty was so definitely settled by the former re- 
volt that it should awaken no interest in the yet un- 
fallen ranks of beings before the throne of God. 
The inquiry could not but occur whether this race 
would be consigned also to punishment with no 
hope of remission, or whether some arrangement 
would be made to check and stay the evil and to 
prevent the consequences of the apostasy. And 
though the question would be one on which no light 
could be thrown from experience, yet it is not un- 
reasonable to suppose that all the difficulties would 
occur in regard to the question of pardon which we 
have found actually to encompass it. To angelic 



272 THE ATONEMENT. 

beings the difficulties might be as much beyond 
their range of observation as they are beyond ours. 
What has surpassed all the wisdom of legislators 
and statesmen — the proper adjusting of the exercise 
of mercy with the claims of justice — might be also 
beyond the reach of angelic intellect. There is no 
reason to suppose that the device of an atonement 
would have occurred to them as a practicable ar- 
rangement ; it could not be supposed that they would 
infer that even the Divine benevolence would sug- 
gest this. It might not be that any of the expres- 
sions of that benevolence before made would sug- 
gest or justify the inference that it would prompt to 
the exercise of mercy. From any thing that appears, 
the question of 'pardon would be as much above the 
comprehension of angelic beings as it has been 
above the practical adjustment of the most wise and 
benevolent of the legislators of earth. And yet the 
statements in the Bible which imply that they did 
feel an interest in the question are such as naturally 
follow from all the conceptions which we must form 
of the benevolence of unfallen beings. 

(c.) We may suppose that the inhabitants of other 
worlds ma}^ see in the atonement some develop- 
ment of the Divine character which could not be 
elsewhere seen. The reasons for this opinion are 
such as the following. 

1. It is reasonable to suppose that the inhabitants 
of other worlds desire to become acquainted with the 
character and government of God ; and it is equally 
reasonable to suppose that, in a great measure, they 
become acquainted with that character and govern- 
ment from what they see m his works. The universe 



THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 273 

seems to have been designed to convey to intelligent 
creatures a knowledge of God ; and we have no rea- 
son to suppose that, as . a great law, even unfallen 
beings can become acquainted with him except 
through his w^orks. Those works, so vast and so 
varied, appear to be adapted to the eternal contem- 
plation of created minds. It was a great problem 
so to create mind, and so to adapt the universe to 
it, that it might have employment forever, — that the 
works of God should be such that there w^ould never 
come over any created intellect, however exalted, the 
feeling that the subject was exhausted; that there 
remained nothing of God to be learned ; that there 
were no fields of unexplored inquiry and thought. 

2. Each one of the worlds appears to have been 
so made as to furnish some peculiar view of God ; 
to teach some lesson wdiich could not be learned 
from any other world ; to convey some truth about 
the Divine character which could be seen nowhere 
else. This seems to be manifest from the wonder- 
ful variety in the worlds which God has made, — the 
variety in their size, their motions, their appendages, 
their orbits. Even with our very imperfect know- 
ledge of the subject, we can see that there would be 
things to learn of God on the planet Mars which 
could not be on the earth ; on Jupiter, which could 
not be on Mars ; on Saturn, which could not be on Ju- 
piter ; on the sun, which could not be on any of the 
planets; on double stars, which could not be on one 
solitary sun; on the distant nebulse, which could 
not be on the galaxy or milky way — the nebulae of 
which our solar system is a part. It is not improbable 
that on each of those worlds there may be a develop- 



274 THE ATONEMENT. 

ment of some attribute of God of which we can 
now form no conception; some trait of character 
a knowledge of which could not now be conveyed 
to beings with our imperfect powers, though it 
might be to those of a higher order ; and that even 
beyond all this, there may be depths in the Divine 
nature — an infinity of attributes and perfections — 
which even those higher orders of intelligences 
have now no powers to penetrate or comprehend, — 
as far above them as their knowledge is above us. 

3. It is probable that what is to be learned from 
our world of the works and ways of God is to be in 
connection with the manifestation of his character in 
the salvation of the guilty ; and perhaps this is to be 
learned in our world alone. The greatness, the 
majesty, the wisdom, the goodness of God may be 
seen in other worlds in lessons far surpassing in im- 
pressiveness and grandeur those which can be learned 
from the earth. The angels do not need to come to 
our world to gain wisdom and knowledge on any of 
these subjects. The earth is not distinguished for its 
magnitude, for peculiar beauty, or for grandeur of 
movement, above other worlds. The dwellers in 
other worlds need not come down to us to learn 
lessons of grandeur from our hills and mountains, 
from our oceans or rivers, from our caves or cata- 
racts. To those w^ho have ranged from world to 
world amidst the works of God, there might not be 
any thing that would attract attention in the vast 
ocean, so sublime in the view of man; in the 
storm and tempest; in Mont Blanc or in Niagara. 
Still less would they be attracted by the monuments 
that man has reared ; the works of art and power 



THE NATUKE OF THE ATONEMENT. 275 

that SO impress our minds ; the Pyramid, the mauso- 
leum, the triumphal arch, the monuments that have 
been raised to mark the place where sleep the illus- 
trious dead. Hence, in the visits of angels to the 
earth, we are never told of their being attracted to 
Thebes or Palmyra, to the Pantheon or the Par- 
thenon, to Marathon or Leuctra. "We find them in 
the humble abode of Mary, and at Bethlehem; in 
the Garden of Gethsemane; at the grave of the Sa- 
viour ; at Mount Olivet. Frequent as have been the 
visits of angels to our world, there is no evidence 
that they have been attracted to the Vatican or the 
Louvre, that they have felt the slightest interest in 
the Cartoons of Raphael, the Last Judgment of 
Michael Angelo, or the sculptures of Canova. 

If it be asked, then, what angelic beings could be 
supposed to learn on earth which they could not 
learn in other worlds, — what gives to our world any 
distinction or peculiarity as illustrating the perfec- 
tions of God, — our answer must be that this is to be 
found in the arrangements for the pardon of sin, in 
blending together in the work of redemption the 
attributes of justice and mercy. In no human 
government, as we have seen, have these attributes 
been blended. In no individual character on earth 
have they been perfectly combined. In no other 
world, so far as we know, have they been united. 
Angelic beings, therefore, could see in the work of 
redemption on earth a manifestation of the character 
of God more interesting by far, as we must suppose, 
than the exhibition of power and wisdom in the 
work of creation ; and hence they were attracted to 
Bethlehem, to the Garden of Gethsemane, to the 



276 THE ATONEMENT. 

sepulchre where the Redeemer had lain, and to 
Mount Olivet; and hence they are attracted to 
every spot where a sinner weeps over his sins and 
seeks for pardon and salvation through the blood 
of the cross. 

There may be bearings of the atonement on other 
worlds which we cannot now understand ; for as yet 
we see but little of the effect of the great work of 
the incarnation of the Son of God. It is possible 
that some of the highest developments of the effects 
of the atonement may yet be made on distant worlds. 
'No one can demonstrate that the remark of Lord 
Bacon will not yet be found to be true : — "All things 
in time and eternity have respect to the Mediator, 
which is the great mystery and perfect centre of all 
God's ways, and to which all his other works and 
wonders do but serve and refer." 



CONFIRMATION FROM THE BIBLE. 277 



CHAPTER VIIL 

CONFIRMATION OF THESE VIEWS OF THE NATURE OF 
THE ATONEMENT FROM THE BIBLE. 

The essential points to be established from the 
Scriptures, as confirming the views which have been 
taken of the atonement in the previous chapters, are 
the following. 

I. That it is through Christ that reconciliation is 
effected between God and man. 

II. That in accomplishing this he suffered and 
died as a substitute in the place of sinners. 

III. That not only was he himself a substitute, 
but that his sufferings were substituted sufferings, and 
not the literal penalty of the law. 

lY. That this substitution consisted essentially in 
his blood; that is, in tbe sacrifice of bis life. 

V. That tlie avails of his sufferings may become 
ours in such a sense that they may be a proper 
ground of our salvation; that is, a public and 
sufiicient reason why God should treat sinners as if 
they were righteous. 

If these points are made out from the Scriptures, 
then it is clear that that has been accomplished 
which it was necessary should be accomplished in 
the salvation of man, and that the difficulties are 
met which so much embarrass human governments 
on the subject of pardon. 

24 



278 THE ATONEMENT. 

I. The first point is that it is through Christ that 
reconciliation is effected between God and man. 

A few passages of the l!^ew Testament will put 
this point beyond dispute. 

Romans v. 10, 11 : "For if when we were enemies 
we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, 
much more, heing reconciled, we shall be saved by his 
life. And not only so, but we also joy in God, 
through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have 
now received the atonemenV (Marg. reconciliation.) 
The same Greek word occurs in various forms in 
each of these passages. The verb (verse 10) — xaraX- 
Xdaao) — means, properl}^, "to change against any 
thing; to exchange for, e.g. money." Then to 
change a person towards another, from enmity to 
friendship ; to reconcile to any one. {Boh. Lex.) The 
noun (verse 11) — xarolXayrj — corresponds, of course, 
with this signification, and denotes a change from 
enmity to friendship. The verb occurs only in 
the following places in the ITew Testament: — Rom. 
V. 10, 'we were reconciled to God;' 'being reconciled;' 

1 Cor. vii. 11, 'Let her remain unmarried, or be 
reconciled to [her] husband;' 2 Cor. v. 18, 'Of God, 
who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ;' 

2 Cor. V. 19, 'reconciling the world unto himself;' 
2 Cor. V. 20, 'Be ye reconciled to God.' The noun 
occurs only in the following places: — Rom. v. 11, 'by 
whom we have received the atonement;' Rom. xi. 15, 
'the reconciling of the world;' 2 Cor. v. 18, 'the 
ministry of reconciliation ;' 2 Cor. v. 18, 'the word of 
reconciliation.'' 

In 1 Cor. vii. 11, 'let her remain unmarried, or 
be reconciled to her husband,' — which is the only in- 



CONFIRMATION FROM THE BIBLE. 279 

stance where the word occurs in the New Testament 
except as connected with the atonement, and which 
may therefore be used to illustrate the meaning of 
the word when applied to the atonement, — there 
can be no doubt as to its meaning. It refers to a 
case where a woman had ' departed' from her hus- 
band ; that is, where there had been a separation. 
That separation had been wholly her act. The 
change, therefore, was to be on her part ; and the 
effect was to be reunion, or reconciliation, with her 
husband. The existing state was one of separation ; 
the thing to be eiFected was reunion : the means in 
the case was to be a change in herself. The point 
reached was a reunion where there had been an 
alienation or estrangement. The proper use of the 
word in reference to man is to express the same idea 
in his relation to God. The point supposed is that 
of alienation or estrangement. The point to be 
effected is a reunion with God. The change, so far as 
indicated by the word, is to be in one of the par- 
tics, — in this case in man, — thus differing from 
another Greek word, — dcaXdaao), — which properly im- 
plies mutual change. (Tittm. de Syn. IT. T., p. 101, 
seq., as quoted by Eobinson, Lex.) The means, or 
medium, of the reconciliation or the reunion of God 
and man is expressl}' declared to be the Lord Jesus 
Christ, ' by whom we have now received the recon- 
cillation,' (Kom. v. 11,) — which is the very point to be 
made out. 

The same idea occurs in the passages in 2 Corin- 
thians V. Thus, in verse 18 of that chapter, it is 
said, " All things are of God, who hath reconciled us 
to himself by Jesus Christ." The statement here is 



280 THE ATONEMENT. 

explicit as to the point now under consideration, — 
that a reconciliation is effected between God and 
man, and that this is accomplished by Jesus Christ. 
The same idea is repeated in verse 19 of the same 
chapter : — " God was in Christ reconciling the world 
unto himself." That is, God, by the agency of 
Christ, was reconciling the world unto himself. 
And the same idea is implied in verse 20 of the 
same chapter: — "As though God did beseech you 
by us, we pray you, in Christ's stead, be ye recon- 
ciled to God." That is, as ambassadors of Christ, 
they (the apostles) plead with men that they 
would be reconciled to God. They came in his 
name. They occupied, by appointment, his place. 
They did what he would do if he were personally 
addressing them. In other words, God was the 
great agent by whom this reconciliation was to be 
effected, and the apostles were merely his ambas- 
sadors in carrying out the great work intrusted to 
them . 

The meaning of these passages cannot be mis- 
taken. In all of them it is implied {a) that there 
was an alienation between man and God; {h) that 
there were obstacles to be overcome before a recon- 
ciliation could be secured; and {c) that these obsta- 
cles were in fact overcome, and the reconciliation 
secured, by the intervention and work of the Re- 
deemer. As it is impossible to convey the idea that 
it is by means of Christ that reconciliation is effected 
between God and man, in any plainer language than 
that which occurs in these passages, the point may 
be regarded as demonstrated. 

II. The second point is, that, in securing this re- 



CONFIRMATION FROM THE BIBLE. 281 

conciliation, Christ was properly a substitute in the 
place of sinners. A 'substitute' is "one person put 
in the place of another to answer the same pur- 
pose." — Webster. The idea is, that the person sub- 
stituted is to do or suffer the same thing which 
the person for whom he is substituted would have 
done. An agent, an attorney, or a representative, 
is to act for the person for whom he is substituted 
as the person himself would have done in the case. 
A nation is threatened with invasion. The inhabit- 
ants of a certain district are assembled, and a 
Mraft' is made of a certain proportion to constitute 
a military force to repel the invader. When one is 
drawn to serve in the army, instead of going him- 
self, he is permitted to employ, at his own expense, 
another, who shall be equally able-bodied and 
equally skilled in the 'art of war.' He who is tbus 
voluntarily substituted in the place of him that was 
drafted to perform the service goes forth in his 
stead, to do what he was to do, to suffer what he 
would have suffered, to encounter the danger which 
he would have encountered. If he experiences cold 
and hunger in the service, it is in the place of what 
he on whom the lot fell would have suffered ; if he 
dies on the field of battle, it is in his stead ; if he 
renders any service in repelling the foe or in esta- 
blishing the liberties of his country, it is in his place ; 
if he is crowned with the rewards due to a victor, he 
wears the garland which the man in whose place he 
was substituted would have worn. 

So, in the plan of atonement, it is supposed that 
the Lord Jesus Christ took the place of sinners. 
He died that they might not die. He placed him- 

24* 



282 THE ATONEMENT. 

self between them and the sword of justice ; he re- 
ceived in his own person, as far as could be done, what 
was due to them ; and he thus saved them from ex- 
periencing in the world of despair what was due to 
their sins. He effected so much by his voluntary 
sufferings that it was not necessary, by any demands 
of justice, to inflict the penalty of the law on 
those for whom he died. 

Two passages of Scripture will illustrate what is 
meant by substitution, though they are not here 
adduced as proof that Christ died in the place of 
sinners. One occurs in John xi. 49, 50 : " And one 
of them, named Caiaphas, being the high-priest that 
same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all, 
nor consider that it is expedient for us that one man 
should die for the people and that the whole nation 
perish not." The idea of Caiaphas is not that Jesus 
would die as a sacrifice for sin, but that his death 
would avert the ruin of the nation ; that, unless he 
was thus put to death, the Romans would come and 
take away their place and nation. In what way he 
supposed that this would avert such a calamity, it is 
not necessary now to inquire. The idea is simply 
that his death would in some way be instead of the 
ruin of the nation. Perhaps he meant that by thus 
giving him up to death they would show their zeal 
for the suppression of every thing that seemed to 
endanger the Roman power, and that, if this was 
not shown in a case like this, the Romans would 
suppose that they were disposed to encourage a spirit 
of insubordination and revolt, and would come and 
inflict summary vengeance on them. The other 
passage occurs in Isaiah xliii. 3, 4 : " I am the Lord 



CONFIRMATION FROM THE BIBLE. 283 

thy God, the Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour; I gave 
Egypt for thy ransom, Ethiopia and Seba for thee. 
Since thou wast precious in my sight, thou hast 
been honourable, and I have loved thee : therefore 
I will give men for thee, and people for thy life." 
The idea here is, that the Egyptians were regarded as 
having been given up to destruction instead of the He- 
brews. Either the Jewish or the Egyptian people must 
perish ; and God chose that Egypt, though so much 
more mighty, should he reduced to desolation in 
order to deliver the Hebrew people. They were 
destroyed instead of the Hebrews, and in order that 
they might be delivered from bondage. On the same 
principle it is said, in verse 4, that God would con- 
tinue to do this. His people were so precious in 
his sight that he says, ' I will,' if necessary, 'give men,' 
that is, the men of other nations, 'for thee, and 
people,' that is, the people of other lands, 'for thy 
life.' He would not see his own people ruined; 
and if the case should occur that one or the other 
must perish, he would deliver up the people of other 
lands to ruin rather than his own people. This is 
referred to now, not as having any reference to the 
atonement, but as an illustration of it. The regular 
course of things would have been that the Hebrews 
would have been crushed and destroyed. But God 
chose that it should be otherwise, and preferred 
that the calamity should come upon the Egyptians. 
In the case of redemption, ruin was coming upon 
the race of man. It was certain that unless there 
was some substitution the race would perish. Suf- 
ferings indescribable and awful — sufferings that 
would express the Divine sense of the value of law 



284 THE ATONEMENT. 

and of the evil of a violation of that law — must come 
either upon the offenders themselves, or upon some 
one who should take their place; and God chose 
that those sufferings should come upon the Re- 
deemer rather than upon the guilty. Thus they 
might be saved, and at the same time there might 
be an expression of the Divine sense of the value 
of law and of the evil of a violation of that law, as 
clear and as impressive as though the guilty had 
themselves borne the full penalty of the law. 

That this is the doctrine of the Scriptures will be 
apparent from the passages now to be quoted. 

One of the words which properly denote in place 
of, or instead of, in the sense of substitution, is the 
Greek dvrl, [anti.) That this word denotes substitu- 
tion, or in the place of, is apparent from these pass- 
ages : — Matt. ii. 22: " Jn the room [dm] of his 
father Herod." Matt. v. 38: "An eye for [avr/] 
an eye, and a tooth for [dvr/] a tooth." Luke xi. 11 : 
"If he ask a fish, will he for [dvW] a fish give him 
a serpent?" James iv. 15 : "jPor [dvW] that," that 
is, instead of that, "ye ought to say." Yet this 
word is used by the Redeemer in explaining the 
object for which he came into the world: — Matt. 
XX. 28: "Even as the Son of man came not to be 
ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life 
a ransom for [dvW] many;" that is, his life was a 
ransom — Xurpov — in the place of the many. There is 
no word in the Greek language which would more 
naturally convey the idea of a substitution than this. 
There is none which a writer intending to express the 
thought that one did any thing in the place of 
another, would more naturally employ. It may be 



CONFIRMATION FROM THE BIBLE. 285 

added that, if it was not the purpose of the Saviour to 
convey this idea, it is difficult to account for the 
fact that a word should have been used which would 
be so likely to deceive the world as to the true in- 
tent and object of his coming. Beyond all doubt, he 
used a word in the language which he employed 
(probably the Syro-Chaldaic) whose natural and 
proper signification would be expressed by the Greek 
word dvrr, {anii,) instead of^ in the jplace of. 

Another G reek word which conveys the same idea 
of substitution is uTiep, (hyper.) The word conveys the 
general idea of protection, care, benefit, favour, for, 
in behalf of for the sake of; properly, as if bending 
over (urJp) a person or thing, and thus warding ofi:' 
what might fall upon it and harm it. {Boh. Lex.) 
Hence it comes to be used after words which imply 
the sufifering of evil or death for, or in behalf of any 
one ; and it is in this sense that it is employed in 
reference to the death of Christ. The general sense 
of doing any thing in behalf of for the sake of may 
be seen in the following passages : — John xvii. 19 ; 
Acts xxi. 26 ; 2 Cor. iii. 8 ; Col. i. 7, iv. 12 ; Heb. 
vi. 20, xiii. 17. The particular idea as applicable to 
the work of the Redeemer, in the sense that his 
death was in behalf of or for us, — that is, was so sub- 
stituted as to avert the curse that was descending on 
us, — may be seen in the following passages : — Luke 
xxii. 19 : " This is my body which is given /or luTzif)'} 
you." Luke xxii. 20: "This cup is the new testa- 
ment in my blood which is shed for [uTrip'] you." 
John vi. 51 : " The bread which I will give is my 
flesh, which I will give for [pnip'] the life of the 
world." John x. 11 : " The good shepherd giveth 



286 THE ATONEMENT. 

his life for [pnep] the sheep." John x. 15: "I lay 
down my life for \u7tip] the sheep." John xv. 13: 
" Greater love hath no man than this, that a man 
lay down his life /or [pTiip] his friends." Still more 
explicitly the idea occurs in the following language : — 
" For when we were yet without strength, in due 
time Christ died for \pnip] the ungodly." Kom. v. 
6. "While we were yet sinners, Christ died for 
{p7isp'\ us." Rom. V. 8. "He that spared not his 
own Son, but delivered him up for [piiip] us all." 
Eom. viii. 32. " Destroy not him with thy meat for 
[pnep] whom Christ died." Kom. xiv. 15. So also 
in 1 Cor. i. 13 : " Was Paul crucified/or [oTtip] you?" 
1 Cor. V. 7 : " Christ our Passover is sacrificed for 
[uTiip] us." 1 Cor. XV. 3: "I delivered unto you 
first of all that which I also received, how that 
Christ died for [uTiep] our sins." 2 Cor. v. 14, 15: 
"We thus judge that if one died /or [pnip] all, then 
w^ere all dead ; and that he died for \_07:ep] all, that 
they which live should not henceforth live unto 
themselves, but unto him which died /or [unip} them 
and rose again." 2 Cor. v. 21 : "He hath made 
him to be sin for [onip'] us, who knew no sin." Gal. 
i. 4: "Who gave himself /or [unep'] our sins." Gal. 
ii. 20 : "Who gave himself /or [pnip'] me." Gal. iii. 
13 : " Being made a curse for [p7iep~\ us." Eph. v. 
2 : " Christ hath loved us, and given himself for 
IpTtep'] us." Eph. V. 25: "Christ loved the church, 
and gave himself for [pnep'] it." 1 Thess. v. 10: 
"Who died for {Pitep'] us." 1 Tim. ii. 6: "Who 
gave himself a ransom /or [pnip'] all." Titus ii. 14: 
"Who gave himself for [pitep'] us." Heb. ii. 9: 
" That he by the grace of God should taste death 



CONFIRMATION FROM THE BIBLE. 287 

for [vnip] every man." 1 Peter ii. 21 : "Because 
Christ also suffered for [uTiep] us." 1 Peter iii. 18 : 
*'For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the 
just for \p7iep] the unjust." 1 Peter iv. 1 : "Foras- 
much, then, as Christ hath suffered for [pnip] us in 
the flesh." 1 John iii. 16: "Because he laid down 
his life /or [oTtep] us." 

These passages undoubtedly express the idea of 
substitution. The language is such as a Greek 
would use if he luished to convey that idea. He 
could find no better terms in his own copious lan- 
guage to express that thought; and if this language 
does not convey the idea, then it is impossible to 
express so plain a thought in human language. 
Those who believe the doctrine of substitution, or 
the doctrine that Christ died in the place of sinners, 
have no plainer words by which to express their 
belief than those which are employed in these pass- 
ages of the ISTew Testament ; and why should it not 
be supposed that language in the Bible equally ex- 
plicit and apparently unambiguous — language which 
men now themselves employ as best adapted to con- 
vey their meaning — should express, as it seems to, the 
same idea? Is it impossible for God to convey so 
plain a thought to mankind as that He whom he 
sent into the world died as a substitute for sinners, 
or that his death was in their stead ? And, if he 
meant to do this, could even he find human lan- 
guage which would convey the doctrine more clearly ? 
And would he employ language commonly used to 
denote the idea of substitution, unless that was the 
true doctrine? "Would he use lansruage which 



would deceive the great mass of those for whom the 



288 THE ATONEMENT. 

Bible was given ? Could we honour a God who 
would do this ? and could we have faith in a book 
claiming to be a revelation where language was 
thus employed ? 

III. The third point necessary to be established 
is, that the sufierings of the Kedeemer were substi- 
tuted sufferings, or that the}^ were not the real and 
literal penalty of the law. This differs from the point 
which has just been considered. That was, that he 
himself was a substitute, or that he took the place of 
sinners and died in their stead ; that is, it was not 
the person who had violated the law who suffered, 
but another in his place. The point now to be esta- 
blished is, that the sufferings themselves loere substituted 
sufferings, or that they were not the real and literal 
penalty of the law, but were in the place of that 
penalty and were designed to answer the same end. 

In a previous chapter I have endeavoured to 
show that it does not enter into a just view of the 
atonement that he who made it should endure the 
same sufferings as the guilty for whom he died, or 
that he should bear the same amount of suffer- 
ing ; or, in other words, that he should endure the 
literal penalty of the law. The question was then 
argued on general grounds, without any particular 
reference to the Scriptures. The inquiry now is, 
whether the Bible teaches that Christ endured the 
real and literal penalty of the law, or whether the 
doctrine of the Bible is that his sufferings were sub- 
stiiuted sufferings, as well as that he himself was a 
substituted person. 

This question I shall endeavour to answer by show- 
ing, first, that in the treatment of the Eedeemer, God 



CONFIRMATION FROM THE BIBLE. 289 

regarded him as righteous and declared him to be 
righteous ; second, that the statements in the Bible 
do not imply that he endured the penalty of the 
law; and, third, that the doctrine of the Bible is 
that his sufferings were substituted sufferings. 

(1.) In the Divine treatment of the Redeemer, God 
regarded him as righteous and declared him to be 
rio:hteous. There is no intimation that he was in 
any sense, either personally or by implication, re- 
garded as undeserving or sinful ; that, on any ac- 
count, he deserved the sufferings which came upon 
him ; that any affliction came upon him which, by 
a fair interpretation, could be construed as implying 
that he was not at that very moment the object in 
the highest degree of the Divine favour. In other 
words, he is never spoken of as in any sense of the 
term guilty ; nor was there any act of God towards 
him which was not susceptible of an explanation on 
the supposition that he was perfectly holy and was 
at that moment the object of God's highest love. 

This point is so plain in the '^qw Testament that 
it is scarcely necessary to attempt to demonstrate it ; 
but it is important to remark how carefully it is 
stated, and how constantly the idea is held up to the 
mind, as if it was supposed that at some time in the 
future history of the Church, a view of the atone- 
ment would be held which would be based on the 
idea that the Redeemer so took the sins of men upon 
him that it would be right to speak of him as guilty, 
or that such views of the imputation of sin would 
be held that the fair interpretation of those views 
would be that there was a transfer of guilt to him, 
and that it w^ould be proper to speak of him as a. 

T 25 



290 THE ATONEMENT. 

'sinner,' — as suffering 'justly,' — as so exactly in the 
place of sinners that he could properly be spoken of 
in the same language which would be applied to 
them. Such language has been used, and such 
views have been entertained; and it was apparently 
in anticipation of the fact that such views would be 
held and such language employed that so much 
care was taken so to state the fact of his perfect in- 
nocence that the best security should be provided 
against such an abuse of the doctrine of the atone- 
ment. As an illustration of the views which it was 
foreseen w^ould be held, and as showing the pro- 
priety of the Divine caution on the subject, the fol- 
lowing language of the great Reformer, Luther, 
may be referred to. I^o thing but the importance of 
the point now before us will justify me even in 
placing this language before the eyes of my readers. 
" And this," says Luther,* " no doubt all the pro- 
phets did foresee in spirit, — that Christ should become 
the greatest transgressor, murderer, adulterer, thief, rebel, 
blasphemer, that ever was or could be in the 
WORLD. For he, being made a sacrifice for the sins 
of the whole world, is not now an innocent person 
and without sins ; is not now the Son of God, born 
of the Virgin Mary ; but a sinner w^hich hath and 
carrieth the sin of Paul, who was a blasphemer, an 
oppressor, and a persecutor ; of Peter, which denied 
Christ ; of David, which was an adulterer, a mur- 
derer, and caused the Gentiles to blaspheme the 
name of the Lord ; and, briefly, which hath and 



* Com. on the Epistle to the Galatians, ch. iii. 13, pp. 213-215. 
Ed. London, 1838. 



CONFIRMATION FROM THE BIBLE. 291 

beareth all the sins of all men in his body : not that 
he himself committed them, but for that he received 
them, being committed or done of us, and laid them 
upon his own body, that he might make satisfaction 
for them with his own blood. Therefore, this gene- 
ral sentence of Moses comprehendeth him also, 
(albeit in his own person he was innocent,) because 
it found him amongst sinners and transgressors; 
like as the magistrate taketh him for a thief, and 
punisheth him, whom he findeth among other thieves 
and transgressors, though he never committed any 
thing worthy of death. When the law, therefore, 
found him among thieves, it condemned and killed 
him as a thief." "K thou wilt deny him to be a 
sinner and accursed, deny also that he was crucified 
and was dead." "But if it be not absurd to confess 
and believe that Christ was crucified between two 
thieves, then it is not absurd to say that he was 

ACCURSED, AND OF ALL SINNERS THE GREATEST." " God, 

our most merciful Father, sent his only Son into the 
world, and laid upon him all the sins of all men, 
saying, Be thou Peter, that denier ; Paul, that perse- 
cutor, blasphemer, and cruel oppressor ; David, that 
adulterer; that sinner which did eat the apple in 
Paradise; that thief which hanged upon the cross; 
and, briefly, be thou the person which hath com- 
mitted all the sins of all men. See, therefore, that 
thou pay and satisfy for them."* 

On this point, however, the teachings of the l^ew 
Testament are plain and unequivocal. 1 Peter ii. 
22: "Who did no sin; neither was guile found in 

* The underscoring is mine. 



292 THE ATONEMENT. 

his mouth." Heh. iv. 15: "But was in all points 
tempted like as we are, yet without sin." Heb. vii. 
26: "Who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate 
from sinners." 1 Petef iii. 18: "For Christ also 
hath once suffered for sin, the just for the unjust." 
Isa. liii. 9 : "Because he had done no violence, neither 
was any deceit in his mouth." Isa. liii. 11: "By 
his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify 
many." Matt. ii. 17 : "This is my beloved Son, in 
whom I am well pleased,' '—sudoxy^aco,— where the form 
of the word (the aorisi) shows that the affirmation 
that God was ' well pleased' with him had no refer- 
ence to any particular tme, but pertained to all 
times. He was always well pleased with him. 

In the nature of the case, also, it cannot be doubted 
that the character of Christ was always well pleasing 
to God. In his undertaking the work of redemp- 
tion ; in his manifested character on earth ; in his 
teachings; in the spirit with which he bore his 
trials ; in his readiness to meet death, and in the 
manner in which he actually met it ; in the offers 
of salvation which he made to mankind on the 
ground of the sacrifice which he made for human 
guilt, no one who believes in the Saviour at all can 
doubt that he was in all respects pleasing to God. 
Whatever were the sufferings which were brought 
upon him, they were not of the nature of punishment 
for his own offences ; whatever was the reason why he 
was left to darkness and gloom on the cross, it was 
not because he had incurred for himself the wrath of 
God. In the very midst of those sufferings he was 
performing a work which, of all the works ever per- 



CONFIRMATION FROM THE BIBLEo 293 

formed on the earth, was most acceptable to a pure 
and holy God. 

(2.) The fair teachings of the Bible do not imply 
that he endured the penalty of the law. 

K an attempt were made to show that he did en- 
dure the literal penalty of the law, reliance would 
be placed on such texts as the following : — Isa. liii : 
"The Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all." 
2 Cor. V. 21 : "For he hath made him to be sin for 
us." Gal. iii. 13: " Christ hath redeemed us from 
the curse of the law, being made a curse for us." 
1 Peter ii. 24 : " Who his own self bare our sins in 
his own body on the tree." Isa. liii. 12: "He bare 
the sin of many." 

These passages are so far similar that the same 
general remarks may be made in regard to them all. 
That they prove that Christ died for the sins of men ; 
that he took the place of sinners ; that his death was 
a sacrifice ; that he made a true atonement for 
human guilt, are points fully established by them : 
at least, between those who hold the doctrine de- 
fended in this treatise, and those who maintain that 
Christ endured the literal penalty of the law, there 
will be, in these respects, no difference of opinion. 

In respect, however, to the question whether they 
teach that he endured the literal penalty of the law, 
the following observations may be made. 

(a) They are fairly susceptible of an interpretation 
in accordance with the belief that he did not endure 
the literal penalty of the law. It is incumbent on 
those who hold that he did endure the literal penalty 
of the law to show, not merely that these passages 
might be so construed as to teach that doctrine, but 

25«- 



294 THE ATONEMENT. 

that they are susceptible of no other interpretation. 
If they taught that there was a transfer of moral 
character or of guilt in the proper sense of the term, 
or if that doctrine was fairly proved by any other 
passages of the Bible, then it would be necessary to 
admit that this would be the fair interpretation of 
these passages. The question is, whether they neces- 
sarily imply this. A few remarks on these passages 
will show that this interpretation is not required, 
but that they are susceptible of another explana- 
tion. 

The passage in 2 Cor. v. 21 — "he hath made him 
to be sin for us" — cannot be intended to be literally 
true. Even those who maintain that he endured 
the penalty of the law cannot hold, and do not pro- 
fess to hold, that it was literally true that he was 
made to be sin. In no proper sense can it be 
true that he was made to be a sinner; for this would 
be contrary to the teaching of the passages just 
quoted, that he 'knew no sin,' that he was 'holy, 
harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners,* and 
that he 'died the just for the unjust.' We must 
therefore look for some other interpretation than 
the literal one; and that is found in the doctrine that 
the word here rendered sin, in accordance with He- 
brew usage, is employed in the sense of sin-offering. 
Compare lios. iv. 8 ; Ezek. xliii. 22, 25, xliv. 29, xlv. 
22, 23, 25 ; Lev. vi. 18, 23. 

A similar passage occurs in Galatians iii. 13 : 
" Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, 
being made a curse for us." The word here used, 
and rendered curse, — xazdpa, — means properly, as with 
us, cursing, malediction, execration, a devoting or doom- 



CONFIRMATION FROM THE BIBLE. 295 

ing to destruction. It occurs in the New Testament 
in the following places : — Col. iii. 10, 13, rendered 
curse; Ileb. vi. 8, James iii. 10, rendered cursing; 
and 2 Peter ii. 14, rendered cursed. It conveys 
the idea of being given over to destruction, or left 
without those influences which would protect and 
save, — as a land that is given over to the curse of 
sterility or barrenness. Applied to a lost sinner, it 
would mean that all saving influences were with- 
drawn and that he was given over to the maledic- 
tion of God. But what is its meaning as applied 
to the Redeemer in the passage now before us? (a.) 
It cannot mean that he was made a curse in the 
sense that his work and character were displeasing 
to God; for, as we have seen, just the contrary doc- 
trine is everywhere taught in the New Testament. 
(b.) It cannot mean that he was the object of the Di- 
vine displeasure, and was therefore abandoned by him 
to deserved destruction, (c.) It cannot be employed 
as denoting that he was in any sense ill deserving or 
blameworthy; for this is equally contrary to the 
teachings of the Bible, (d.) It cannot mean that he 
was giiiltg in the usual and proper meaning of the 
word, and that therefore he was punished; for this 
would not be true, (e.) It cannot mean that he bore 
the literal penalty of the law ; for, as we have seen, 
there are parts of that penalt}^ — remorse of con- 
science, and eternity of suffering — which he did not, 
and could not, bear. (/.) It cannot mean that he 
was sinful, or a sinner, in any sense ; for this is 
equally contrary to all the teachings of the Bible in 
regard to his character, (g.) There is but one other 
conceivable meaning that can be attached to the 



296 THE ATONEMENT. 

passage, and that is that, though innocent, he was 
treated in his death as if he had been guilty; that is, he 
was put to death as ie he had personally deserved 
it. That this is the meaning is implied in the expla- 
nation which the apostle himself gives of his own 
language: — "being made a curse for us; for it is 
written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree." 
He was suspended on a cross, as if he had been a 
malefactor. He was numbered with malefactors; 
he was crucified between them ; he was given up by 
God and man to death as if he had himself been 
such a malefactor. In other words, he was put to 
death in the same manner as he would have been 
if he had been personally guilty of the violation of 
the law. Had he been a thief or murderer, had he 
committed the grossest and blackest crimes, this 
would have been the punishment to which he would 
have been subjected. He consented to die in the 
same manner as the vilest malefactor, in order that 
by his substituted sorrows he might save those who 
were personally guilty. The idea which makes the 
atonement so wonderful — the idea which makes it 
a7i atonement at all — is, that innocence was treated 
as if it were guilt ; that the most pure and holy and 
benevolent being on earth was treated as if he had 
been the most vile and ill deserving. As the ideas 
above referred to exhaust all the conceivable mean- 
ings of the passage before us, the demonstration 
seems to be complete that it cannot mean that the 
Redeemer was made a literal curse, or that he en- 
dured the literal penalty of the law. 

(b.) Those passages are not only susceptible of 
another interpretation than that Christ endured the 



CONFIRMATION FROM THE BIBLE. 297 

penalty of the law, but they must have such an inter- 
pretation. 

1. If this were not so, then it would be proper 
to speak of Christ, as Luther did, as a ' sinner' 
and as the * greatest of sinners.' If the passages 
teach that he was made literally 'sin,' that he 
was made literally a 'curse,' that he literally bore 
the ' iniquity' of men, then the language of Luther 
was proper language, for the views which he ex- 
pressed are but the fair application of such an in- 
terpretation. For if he was ' sin^' and a '-curse^ and 
' hore iniquity* in a literal sense, then no reason can 
be given why the language which properly denotes 
those who are sinners should not be applied to him as 
was done by Luther. In fact, Luther, from his bold- 
ness and consistency, did what others holding the 
same views are afraid to do. He shrank from noth- 
ing : nothing in danger; nothing in regard to his own 
reputation ; nothing in the terms which he applied 
to others who differed from him; and nothing in 
the words to be employed in expressing what he be- 
lieved to be the true teaching of the word of God. 
That men holding the views of a literal imputation 
of sin to the Redeemer, and the doctrine that he 
endured the literal penalty of the law, do not now 
use that language, is to be traced to the heart, and 
not to the head, — to their feelings, and not to their 
logic. Their piety revolts at the conclusions to 
which they would fairly be conducted by their prem- 
ises. Luther's did not. 

2. It would follow, if these passages were not sus- 
ceptible of such an interpretation as that above sug- 
gested, that there was a real transfer of sin to the 



298 THE ATONEMENT. 

Redeemer. If it was literally true that he was 
made 'sin,' that he was a 'curse' for us, that he 
hore 'iniquity,' then it would follow that there was 
a transfer of criminality to him, — that he became so 
identified with sinners for whom he died that he was 
properly and justly regarded as a sinner. It would 
follow that he was not treated as if he had been a 
sinner, but that to all intents and purposes he was 
regarded and treated as a sinner, or as deserving all 
that came upon him. It is not easy to see how this 
conclusion could be avoided, or how we could 
escape the absurdity of holding in words — what no 
man can really believe in fact — that a transfer of 
moral character actually took place. 

3. It would follow, further, that those for whom 
he died could not themselves be held and regarded 
as guilty. If there has been a transfer of their guilt, 
it is no longer their own, and they cannot be respon- 
sible. Two persons cannot be held responsible for 
the same offence. If a debt has been paid by a 
friend, it cannot be demanded of him who originally 
contracted it. If one could be substituted in the 
place of another in a penitentiary, and serve out the 
term of punishment assigned to the original of- 
fender, the offender could not be again imprisoned 
for the crime. If a man who is ' drafted' for mili- 
tary service procures a substitute who is accepted, 
he cannot be made to serve if the substitute dies of 
disease or is killed in battle. And so, if Christ was 
literally made ' sin' and a ' curse ;' if he took literally 
upon himself the sins of men and paid the penalty 
of the law; if there was a real transfer of the whole 



CONFIRMATION FROM THE BIBLE. 299 

matter to him, then it would follow that those whose 
place he took could no longer be held to be guilty. 

4. With equal clearness it would follow that they 
could not be required to repent of the sin which they 
had committed. If the whole matter is transferred 
and cancelled, then it is clear that there can be no 
reason why they should repent, or, indeed, w^hy there 
should be any repentance in the case. Repentance 
is not a thing required by law, for no law makes 
provision for it ; and if all the penalty due to the 
sin has been borne, then there is no occasion for it 
and there would be no propriety in it. At all events, 
if there was a necessity for repentance in any view 
of the matter, the demand would be on the substitute^ 
since he has undertaken to meet atl the demands of 
justice in the case. 

5. It would follow that he who became the sub- 
stitute for the sins of men must be conscious of guilt 
himself and feel the remorse that springs from crime. 
Eemorse and consciousness of guilt go with guilt 
itself, and are indissolubly connected with it ; and if 
there has been a transfer of guilt, then there must 
also be a transfer of the consciousness of guilt and 
of the feeling of remorse, for these are parts of the 
penalty of the law. 

6. On the whole, therefore, according to this view, 
there would be utter confusion in all our notions of 
justice and of right. Every thing would be un- 
settled. All that has been regarded as fixed and 
determined in the minds of men in respect to the 
impossibility of transferring moral character ; to the 
language properly applicable to guilt and innocence ; 
to the connection between a personal offence and 



300 THE ATONEMENT. 

repentance ; between guilt and the consciousness 
of guilt, and between guilt and remorse, would be 
utterly confounded. All the lines which God, in 
our very nature, has drawn between guilt and in- 
nocence, and which are so essential in the adminis- 
tration of justice, would be obliterated; and, if 
these principles were universally adopted, all govern- 
ment in a family, in a state, or in the universe at 
large, would come to an end; for a just government 
cannot be administered except it be an admitted 
principle that moral character cannot be transferred ; 
that ill desert cannot be made over to another ; that 
repentance can be properly required only of the 
offender himself; and that an appeal may be made 
to the consciousness of guilt and to the inflictions 
of remorse, in recovering offenders and inducing 
them to obey law\ 

lY. This substitution consisted essentially in the 
blood of the Redeemer; that is, in the sacrifice of 
his life. 

(1.) The doctrine of the ^N'ew Testament on this 
point is unequivocal. Luke xxii. 20 : *' This cup is 
the new testament in my blood, which is shed for 
you." Col. i. 20: "Having made peace through 
the blood of his cross." Heb. ix. 12 : " ^NTeither by 
the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood, 
he entered in once into the holy place, having ob- 
tained eternal redemption for us." Heb. x. 19 : 
"Having, therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into 
the holiest by the blood of Jesus." 1 Peter i. 2: 
" Elect . . . unto obedience and sprinkling of the 
blood of Jesus Christ." 1 John i. 7 : " The blood 
of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sin." Rev. v. 



CONFIRMATION FROM THE BIBLE. 301 

9 : " Thou hast redeemed us unto God by thy 
blood." Kev. vii. 14: "These are they which carae 
out of great tribulation, and have washed their 
robes, and made them white [pure] in the blood of 
the Lamb." Eph. ii. 13 : "Ye, who sometime were 
far off, are made nigh by the blood of Christ." 1 
Peter i. 18, 19 : " Ye were not redeemed with cor- 
ruptible things, as silver and gold, but with the pre- 
cious blood of Christ." Acts xx. 28: "Feed the 
church of God, which he hatli purchased with his 
own blood." Kom. iii. 25 : " Whom God hath set 
forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood." 
Eph. i. 7 : " We have redemption through his 
blood." See also Col. i. 14; Heb. ix. 12, xiii. 12; 
Matt. xiv. 24. 

(2.) The doctrine of the Hebrews was, that the blood 
is the seat of life, or that the life is in the blood; and 
hence to shed blood became synonymous with 
taking life. Gen. ix. 6 : "Whoso sheddeth man's 
blood, by man shall his blood be shed." Lev. xvii. 
11: "The life of the flesh is in the blood." Gen. 
ix. 4 : " But flesh with the life thereof, which is the 
blood thereof, shall ye not eat." Compare also Lev. 
xix. 26; Deut. xii. 23; 1 Sam. xiv. 84. This was 
also the opinion of the ancient Parsees and Hindoos. 
Homer also often speaks of blood as the seat of life, 
as in the expression rcopipopeoQ dduaroc, or purple 
death. And Virgil thus speaks of purple life: — 

"Purpuream vomit ille animam." — j^neid, ix. 349. 

Empedocles and Critias, among the Greek philoso- 
phers, also embraced this opinion. Not a few, also, 
among the most eminent modern physiologists have 

26 



302 THE ATONEMENT. 

embraced the same doctrine. Harvey — to whom we 
are indebted for a knowledge of the true doctrine 
of the circulation of the blood — fully believed it. 
Hoffman and Huxham believed it. Dr. John Hun- 
ter fully adopted the b-elief, and sustained it by a 
great variety of considerations. (See Good's Book 
of mture, pp. 102-108, ed. New York, 1828.) This 
was undoubtedly the doctrine of the Hebrews; and 
hence with them "to shed blood" was a phrase sig- 
nifying to kill. Hence the efficacy of sacrifices was 
supposed to consist in the blood — that is, in the 
life — of the victim. 

(3.) It followed from this view, that the Hebrews 
spoke indifferently of shedding blood or taking life. 
Hence in the I^ew Testament our redemption is in- 
differently said to be by the blood of the Redeemer 
shed for us, or by his life given for us. 1 John iii. 
16 : " Hereby perceive we the love [of God], because 
he laid down his life for us." John x. 15: "I lay 
down my life for the sheep." Matt. xx. 28: "The 
Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to 
minister, and to give his life a ransom for many." 
John X. 11 : " The good Shepherd giveth his life for 
the sheep." 

The plain doctrine of the l^ew Testament, there- 
fore, is, that the blood of Christ — that is, that the 
giving of his life — was the means of making the 
atonement, or of securing reconciliation between 
man and his Maker. In other words, his life was 
regarded as a sacrifice in the place of sinners, by 
means of which the penalty of the law which man 
had incurred might be averted from him. The 
voluntary death of the Redeemer in the place of 



CONFIRMATION FROM THE BIBLE. 303 

man had such an efficac}^ that man, on account of 
that, might be saved from the punishment which he 
had deserved, and treated as if he had not sinned. 
This is the doctrine of the atonement. 

Y. The other point to be illustrated, in order to 
the completeness of the argument, is, that the avails 
of the suffering and death of the Redeemer may be- 
come ours, or may be the proper ground of our 
salvation ; that is, they may constitute a public and 
sufficient reason why God should treat a sinner as 
if he were righteous. 

In illustration and proof of this, the following re- 
marks may be made. 

(1.) Nothing is more common than that one may 
so avail himself of what another has suffered or 
done as to secure the same result as if he had him- 
self done or suffered it. That is, on account of the 
merit of another, or the claim to public confidence 
or gratitude of another, he may be treated as if that 
merit and that claim were his own. By natural or 
constituted relationship, or by express permission, 
or by the regular course of events under the laws of 
Divine Providence, we are placed on an elevation as 
favourable as if we had ourselves been the actors or 
sufferers, or as if the claim to confidence and grati- 
tude were the fruit of our own virtues or public 
services. There is, indeed, in such a case no trans- 
fer of moral character. There is no confounding of 
identity. There is no annihilation of individuality. 
There is no actual detaching the real merit, the 
real credit, from one, and attributing it to another. 
There is no mistake in supposing for a moment that 
the merit is ours, and there is no injustice in so con- 



304 THE ATONEMENT. 

founding persons and facts as to withhold the real 
praise from him to whom it is due. There is merely 
a position gained, — an advantage realized, — a treat- 
ment secured, — as if the merit were ours, or as if the 
service had been rendered by us. 

A young man commences business. He has, as 
yet, no capital of his own, no public character, no 
credit. But he has a father or a friend who has a 
name, and who has the deserved confidence of the 
community. As an eminent merchant, he has se- 
cured that confidence by a long life of integrity. 
He is known to be a sufficient security for any 
amount of capital that the young man may need, 
and the young man is permitted to use his name in 
procuring that capital from a bank ; and, in addition 
to this, he enters on life with the warm and full 
commendation of his father or friend. In this case, 
the reputation, the character, the standing, of him 
whose name he is permitted to use, become available 
to him in the outset of life in the same manner and 
to the same extent as if they were his own. It is 
true that he may forfeit this confidence by miscon- 
duct, and just as true is it that he might do this if it 
were" founded on his own character; hut until such 
an act occurs he may avail himself of the name of 
another as if this claim to confidence were his own. 

From this well-understood law society derives 
many advantages. The arrangement binds a com- 
munity together. It aids those who are start- 
ing on life. It gives increased value to a character 
for integrity that it may thus be made available for 
the good of others. It multiplies and diffuses the 
benefits of a well-earned reputation, and furnishes a 



CONFIRMATION FROM THE BIBLE. 305 

stimulus for securing such a reputation. But for 
this, it would be difficult to start on life ; but for this, 
it would be impossible to conduct the affairs of busi- 
ness with safety. The principle lies at the foundation 
of all the commercial transactions of the world, and 
is one that would be found to enter into nearly all 
the arrangements of life. 

And this is as true of the effect of suffering as it 
is of integrity and virtue. We avail ourselves of 
the benefit of the sufferings of others as if those suf- 
ferings had been our own. At every moment of our 
lives we are enjoying the avails of the sacrifices and 
self-denials of those who have gone before, as really, 
and, so far as appears, to the same extent, as if they 
had been our own. 

This is true in regard to the privations, perils, and 
toils of patriots. We enjoy the avails of those pri- 
vations, perils, and toils as really as if they had been 
our own, and as really as the patriots who bled 
would have done had their lives been lengthened 
out to our times. Except in the honour of the 
achievements, in the fame which is the result of 
their personal valour, in the grateful remembrance 
which they now receive for their services to their 
country, it does not appear that they would have 
enjoyed any more advantages from their valour 
and their triumphs than we do. Their deeds are 
not, indeed, imputed to us. They are never reckoned 
as in any sense ours. There is no transfer of cha- 
racter or of honour. There is no confounding of 
identity. There is no confusion in the estimate 
which is formed in regard to meritorious services. 
But in respect to the results we are regarded and 

u 26* 



306 THE ATONEMENT. 

treated as if all that valour, self-sacrifice, peril, and 
skill in battle had been ours. 

The same thing is also true in respect to the suf- 
ferings of martyrs. "We enjoy the avails of all those 
sufferings as though they had been our own. It is 
true that we have not been laid on the rack; that 
we have not been imprisoned, scourged, stoned; 
that we have not been bound to a stake or stretched 
on a cross ; that we have not been thrown to wild 
beasts in the amphitheatre ; and it is true also that 
in the estimate of moral character and real worth 
there is no confusion of character, no transfer of 
moral worth ; but in regard to all that is valuable in 
the religion for which they suffered, we enjoy the 
avails of their sufferings as really as they would 
themselves have done had their lives been prolonged 
to the present hour. It is impossible to conceive 
how the martyrs themselves could have enjoyed it 
more in this respect than we are permitted to do ; 
or how, if we had been ourselves the sufferers, we 
could have been more benefited than we are now. 

The principle, therefore, that we may avail our- 
selves of the sufferings and trials of others for our 
own benefit, or may be treated as if those sufferings 
and trials were our own, enters into the very struc- 
ture of all social life. It is difficult to see why, under 
a law that is so universal in reference to our fellow- 
men, it may not also be a principle in the Divine 
administration in reference to the toils and suff'er- 
ings of the Redeemer. 

(2.) The principle of ' supererogation,' or of doing 
more than is required by the exact demands of law,, 
and, therefore, of doing that which may be made 



CONFIRMATION FROM THE BIBLE. 807 

available to others, is one that undoubtedly enters 
into all just notions of the atonement; and it is 
proper to inquire whether this is a principle that is 
found anywhere in human society or in the arrange- 
ments of Providence. It cannot be doubted that it 
is an elementary idea in the work of Christ that his 
whole work was voluntary; that what he did was 
done wholly bn the account of others ; that he was not 
himself bound, by any claims of law or justice, to un- 
dertake the work which he performed, or to endure 
the sorrows connected with it ; and that, therefore, 
the avails of his work may become the ground of 
acceptance of those who have no merit of their own, 
and who are unable to repair the evils of a violated 
law. It is implied in the work of the atonement 
that the Redeemer could do, and did do, more than 
was demanded of him by any claim of law or justice ; 
and that the avails of what he did may and do be- 
come ours. 

The inquiry now is, whether this principle is one 
that is admissible, and whether the Scriptures teach 
that this is a recognised principle in the work of re- 
demption. 

(a.) The principle is recognised among men. It 
exists in the case of service rendered to another. 
Even in the worst form of service among men — that 
of slavery — this occurs. I^othing is more common 
than to assign a task to a slave, — a task which may 
fall far short of the entire occupancy of his time; 
and it is very conceivable that a slave may perform 
more than the assigned task, or may accomplish 
more for his master than was demanded of him. 
Though from the conditions of slavery, in which a 



308 THE ATONEMENT. 

slave is always regarded as not his own, but as the 
property of his master, — as having no right to 
his own time, to the avails of his own labour, to 
his ow^n services, or to jpro;perty of any kind, — he 
could claim nothing as his own, yet, in fact, it may 
occur that he may have a portion of time not de- 
manded in the service of his master, and that the 
avails of that may be appropriated as his own. This 
is strictly a work of supererogation ; and the avails 
of that work ma}^ be appropriated, at his pleasure, 
to the benefit of any other whom he chooses to de- 
signate. It may go to relieve a fellow-servant not 
favoured as he is ; or to purchase the freedom of his 
own wife and children, or the freedom of a friend, 
or his ow^n freedom. Beyond all the actual de- 
mands on himself, it may be set over to such an ac- 
count as he shall designate, and maybe appropriated 
to the good of others. 

The same is true of one who is employed as a 
day-labourer, or by the month, or on a yearly salary. 
There may be a service in each case which can be 
rendered to his employer beyond any thing ex- 
pressly demanded in the contract, and for which he 
may properly expect a reward. Beyond his im- 
mediate occupation, he may have skill in some other 
department that his employer may avail himself of, 
and for which he has a right to expect an additional 
reward. A day-labourer may be a good accountant, 
and his service in that respect might be of great 
value to his employer, though that employer, from 
the terms of the contract which binds him onl}'' to 
labour on his farm, in his machine-shop, or his 
tannery, has no claim on this ; or, in his unoccupied 



CONFIKMATION FROM THE BIBLE. 309 

moments, he may do much to embellish a farm, or to 
strike out some improvement in the art or handi- 
craft-work of his employer that shall be of great 
advantage to him. As this did not enter into the 
terms of the contract, express or implied, the avails 
of it may properly be regarded as his own, and he 
will have a right to appropriate those avails, if he 
pleases, to any one whom he chooses. He may make 
use of all of those avails to instruct the ignorant ; to 
feed the hungry ; to clothe the naked ; to ransom the 
captive, or to send the gospel to a perishing world. 

(b,) We may suppose a case in advance of this, 
where there is no obligation of an}' kind, and where 
all the avails of a service may be appropriated to the 
benefit of others. A man who has ample means of 
support, and on whom, in that particular case, there 
may rest no obligation to serve his country as a sol- 
dier, may be willing to take the place of a poor 
man, with a large family dependent on him, who 
has been ' drafted' into the service. In this case he 
may not only relieve the poor man and suffer him 
to remain with his family, but he may appropriate 
all that shall result from the ' pay' and ' rations' of 
the soldier, as well as the whole of his portion of the 
spoils of victory, to that family, or to any other, as 
he shall choose. Though bound to serve his coun- 
try when called on, yet in this particular case the 
whole work is voluntary, and is in the strictest 
sense a work of supererogation ; that is, it is beyond 
what is demanded of him by any claim of justice or 
of law. In the position which he occupied, he was, 
indeed, bound to serve his country ; but he has as- 
sumed a voluntary position, to which he was not 



310 THE ATONEMENT. 

bound, and the entire fruit of that substitution of 
himself and his service for another may go to the 
benefit of any whom he may choose. 

The principle of supererogation, therefore, is one 
that is universally recognised in the world. The 
error in the Eoman Catholic communion in regard 
to the 'merits of the saints,' and the work of super- 
erogation, is not in the abstract principle: it is tff 
supposing that man may render more to God than 
is demanded of him; that in the service which he 
renders to his Maker he can go beyond the demands 
of the law ; that he can himself originate a service to 
which he was not bound by any prior obligation ; 
and that this may be garnered up, and placed in the 
hands of a priesthood, to be disbursed at their 
pleasure for the benefit of others. The idea is, that 
there may be some service of religion which is not 
demanded on the part of God; some self-sacrifice, 
some merit of fasting, of prayer, of pilgrimage, of 
seclusion from the world, of asceticism, which is 
covered by no command of God, and which may, 
therefore, be an accumulated treasure in the Church 
for the good of others. The doctrine supposes that 
there is a limited amount of service required by 
God, — like that in a contract with a hired servant, — 
and that all beyond that may go to the benefit of 
him who ' merits' it, or may be a part of a grand 
treasure to be placed in the hands of a priesthood, 
and to be appropriated, for a price, to those who are 
cursed with the consciousness of guilt, or who have 
a deficiency of merit of their own. The law of God, 
however, requires that a man shall love his Maker 
with ' all his heart, and all his soul, and all his mind, 



CONFIRMATION FEOM THE BIBLE. 311 

aud all his strength;' that all his time and influence 
shall be given to God. The Divine requirement 
covers all that it is possible for man to do ; and con- 
sequently there can be nothing of a voluntary nature 
on the part of man, or that is originated by him, 
which can be regarded as a work of 'supererogation.' 
If a thing is right and proper in religion, it is that 
which has been prescribed by God, and which, con- 
sequently, cannot be of the nature of superabundant 
merit capable of being transferred to another. If 
that which is supposed to constitute such abundant 
merit be uncommanded, or be of man's originating, 
it can be no part of true religion, and can constitute 
no ground of merit. 

An atonement made by man, therefore, would be 
impossible ; for no man could do more in the cause 
of religion than he is required to do by the law of 
God. !No man has any time that is not covered by 
the law; any talent, skill, or wisdom, that is not 
demanded in the service of God; any influence that 
God does not require should be devoted to his service. 
If man performs any thing that is uncommanded 
and unrequired, it must be by the neglect of some 
duty that is demanded, or by the consumption of 
time that God does require to be devoted to himself, 
and therefore, whatever appearance of merit there 
may be in the case, it is in fact of the nature of sin. 
Man cannot substitute any thing in the place of that 
which his Creator has commanded ; he cannot ori- 
ginate any thing of his own which will have higher 
merit than that which God requires. 

(c.) These remarks, however, do not apply to the 
work of the Redeemer. His is the only case which 



312 THE ATONEMENT. 

has ever occurred, or which could occur, where a 
service could be rendered w^hich was not required 
by a fair application of the law of God, and where, 
therefore, there could be such an accumulation of 
merit, or such a work performed, that it could be 
made available to others as if it were their own. 
This whole work lay beyond the proper range and 
the proper demands of the law ; and the avails of the 
w^ork, therefore, could become the foundation of 
pardon and hope to others. 

1. God was not bound to provide a Saviour. The 
whole work, on his part, was a work of benevolence. 
No claim of justice entered into it. By no fair con- 
struction of the work of redemption could it be in- 
ferred that God regarded the previous arrangements 
in regard to man as unjust, harsh, or severe; and 
by no consideration of justice or of law could he be 
brought under obligation to provide a Saviour for 
men. It is impossible to conceive that God would 
perform an act the fair interpretation of which would 
be that he could properly be regarded by his crea- 
tures as in the wrong, or as bound to make amends 
for the errors of the past. Man could at no time 
have approached the throne of his Maker and urged 
a plea of justice that he should repair the evils of the 
system under which the race was originally made, 
or by which he could have urged that the primitive 
arrangement was so defective in wisdom or benevo- 
lence that he was under obligation to repair it. An 
atonement could never have been based, directly or 
by implication, on an acknowledgment on the part 
of the Deity that the arrangement which made it 
necessary was unwise or unjust. 



CONFIRMATION FROM THE BIBLE. 313 

2. It is eqvially true that the Son of God was 
bound by no law to become incarnate and to un- 
dertake the work of redemption. We cannot con- 
ceive that God would require an innocent being to 
suffer in the place of the guilty; and if the Son of 
God was equal with the Father, or was in the true 
and proper sense of the term Divine, then there was 
no law which could bind him to undertake the work of 
the atonement, or to place himself in a position where 
he would he under law, either to obey it, or to suffer 
its penalties. There are laws of the Divine nature 
which will, of course, be obe37ed by God himself; 
there are principles of eternal justice to which the 
Divine arrangements will be conformed ; but none 
of those laws or principles go to the extent of a de- 
mand that God should place himself in a position 
where he would be under those laws of his own 
enacting which were designed for his creatures, or 
where lie could be under obligation to meet the con- 
sequences which must result from the violation of 
those laws. The Son of God, therefore, could never 
be bound by justice to assume the form of man, to 
place himself under law, to endure any of the suffer- 
ings connected with the violation of law, or to per- 
form the work which the law properly requires of 
man. Whatever he did in that respect was beyond 
the range of any requirements, and must have been a 
pure work of benevolence. 

3. The work of the Saviour was in the place of 
others, and was for others. It was in no respect on 
his own account. As a Divine being, it was not 
necessary for him to undertake this work. He was 
perfect in glory and blessedness in the bosom of the 



314 THE ATONEMENT. 

Father. There was not au act which he performed 
as a man to which he was bound by any original 
obligation ; there was not a pang which he endured 
which could have been inflicted as an act of justice; 
there was not a trial or temptation to which he was 
exposed from which he might not have been exempt. 
Though when a man, and as a man, it was true that 
every consideration bound him to be holy, to be 
obedient to the law of God, and to be patient in his 
trials, yet the whole arrangement on his part was 
voluntar}^, and was designed for the benefit of others. 
He who should voluntarily assume a position by 
which he could render a service in behalf of others 
would indeed be bound to perform all the duties 
usually incident to that condition ; but every thing 
that he did or sufiered, however it might illustrate 
his own character, would be properly regarded as 
done or suffered for the benefit of others. Thus 
it was with the Son of God. His was proj)erly 
a work which could not have been claimed as a 
matter of justice, and might all be considered as a 
work of supererogation. 

4. It follows, therefore, that the avails of that work 
may become ours. We have seen that it was in our 
stead, or on our account ; and it may, therefore, be 
ours. Incapable, indeed, of transfer, as all moral 
character must be ; true as it is and will always be 
that the work of the atonement was made by him 
and not by us; and certain as it is that his merit 
can never be reckoned as really our own, — for God 
will always ' reckon' or estimate things as they are, — 
yet it is also true that we may be treated as if that 
merit were our own, and that we may avail ourselves 



CONFIRMATION FROM THE BIBLE. 315 

of all that Christ has done in honouring the law, and 
meeting its claims, and enduring such sorrows as 
would be a proper expression of the Divine estimate 
of the value of the law and the evils of disobedience, 
as though all this had been done and sufiered by 
ourselves. This is, if I understand it, the true doc- 
trine of * imputation ;' not that there is any transfer 
of moral character from us to the Redeemer, or from 
him to us, and not that God literally 'reckons' or 
imputes our sins to him as his, or his righteousness 
to us as ours, but that his work may be estimated 
as performed in the place and on the account of sin- 
ful men, and that in virtue of that we may be re- 
garded and treated as if it had been performed by 
ourselves. On that account we may be justified and 
saved ; for he has done more to honour the law than 
we should have done by our own obedience ; he has 
done more to show the evil of a violation of law by his 
voluntary sufferings than we should have done if the 
penalty had been inflicted on us ; and he has be- 
come the ' surety' for us, — the public pledge that no 
evil shall result to the universe if we are treated for- 
ever as if we had not sinned. This is the meaning 
of the Scriptures where it is said, " Pie was wounded 
for our transgressions; he was bruised for our ini- 
quities; the chastisement of our peace was upon 
him; and witn his stripes we are healed." Isaiah 
liii. 5. 



316 THE ATONEMENT. 



CHAPTER IX. 

THE EXTENT OF THE ATONEMENT. 

There remains one point to be considered, not 
necessary, indeed, to the main design of this Essay, 
but still of great importance in the bearing which it 
has on the character and government of God, and on 
the manner in which the gospel is to be preached. 
It is the question in regard to the extent of the 
atonement, or the question for whom it was made; 
whether it is available for all, or is, in its own 
nature, or by intention and purpose, limited only to 
a part of mankind; whether it was designed to refer 
to mankind as such, or was intended only for the 
elect. The inquiry to be pursued in this chapter 
relates only to the human race ; for, whatever may 
be its bearing on other worlds, there is no intima- 
tion that it was designed to secure the salvation of 
any other fallen being than man. For some cause 
unknown to us, so far as all the evidence goes, 
fallen angels were suffered to remain in their volun- 
tary ruin, wdth no arrangement for their redemption. 

In reference to the extent of the atonement, the 
sources of evidence must be the following. 

I. The presumption from analogy ; 

II. The probabilities from the nature of the atone- 
ment, and from the rank and dignity of him who 
made it; and, 



THE EXTENT OF THE ATONEMENT. 317 

III. The testimony of the Scriptures. 

I. The presumption from analogy. 

The consideration of this point may be presented 
under two subordinate heads. One is the direct 
form of the argument ; the other is the argument 
as meeting objections to the doctrine of the atone- 
ment, and especially to the doctrine of a general 
atonement. 

A. The direct form of the argument. 

The argument here will be derived from the re- 
medial systems which we find as a part of the Divine 
arrangements on earth, and which in a former 
chapter* were adverted to as furnishing a ground 
of probability that an atonement would be provided 
for fallen men. The reference there made was to 
those natural arrangements which are designed to 
check, palliate, and remove evil, or, in general, to 
remedial systems found on the earth, which, it was 
supposed, might be regarded as preintimatious 
that a remedy of a higher order would be provided 
for the removal of the ills that have befallen our 
race. Particular reference was made to the arrange- 
ments in the materia medica of the world, and to the 
healing processes in nature itself. 

In reference to these remedial systems, as indi- 
cating by analogy what a higher system might be 
expected to be, the following observations may be 
made. 

(1.) These remedial arrangements, though the 
knowledge of them may be in fact confined to a 
few, are of universal applicability. They are as 

* Chapter v. 

. 27* 



318 THE ATONEMENT. 

mucli adapted to one person as to another, — as ap- 
plicable in one clime or in one age of the world as 
another. There is no limitation in the nature of 
the arrangement ; nothing that would confine the 
remedy to any one age or to any one rank or class 
of sufferers, l^o aristocracy of position in dignity 
or wealth confers any special fitness for the favours 
which they are designed to impart; and no infe- 
riorit}^ of station excludes from the benefit. The 
poor man burning with fever finds the bark of Peru 
as much adapted to his condition as the rich man ; 
and the peasant with a broken limb finds the ar- 
rangement for the reunion of the fragments of the 
bone as efficacious in his case as it is in the case of 
the prince. Whatever may prevent the success of 
the remedy, the hinderance will not arise from any 
want of an original applicability to that case; for it 
may be always assumed that the laws of healing are 
the same in all men, and that the remedial system 
is adapted alike to all. 

In respect to the healing art, the race is one. 
There is one system adapted to one race ; and though 
the specific remedies for disease may be scattered in 
different lands, with a special adjustment to what 
may prevail in any one land, yet the principle is of 
universal applicability, and no distinction is found 
in nature in reference to those to whom the remedy 
may be applied. If this may be allowed to be an in- 
dication of what a plan of redemption would be, it 
would, therefore, indicate that the plan would be of 
universal applicability. The presumption is that 
such would be found to be the fact ; and if this is 
found to be the fact, we see a new argument for its 



THE EXTENT OF THE ATONEMENT. 319 

truthfalness in its correspondence with what we 
everywhere observe. If in a professed revelation 
a plan of redemption should be proposed in which 
this was not Sb prominent fact, we should be at once 
sensible of such a departure from the analogy of 
nature as to constitute an objection to the scheme 
w^hich it would not be easy to remove. Such an 
objection would be a constant hinderance to the pro- 
pagation of the system in the world; for it would im- 
pinge on the course of events, and be contradictory 
to the arrangements existing in all the cases which 
would be regarded as in any way analogous to the 
purpose of redemption. 

(2.) The remedial systems of nature are inexhaust- 
ible. So far as appears, there is no limit to the pro- 
visions made for healing disease. There may be 
cases where the remedy is not found out; there may 
be a want of skill in the proper treatment of disease ; 
there may be medicines used which are not adapted 
to the disease which they are employed to cure, and 
which would only aggravate the disease ; there may 
be a maladjustment of the parts of the system of 
healing; but there is no failure in the remedy from 
a deficiency in the amount. At any one period of the 
world, 'nature,' so to speak, has made ample pro- 
vision for all that could be required in arresting the 
progress of disease. So far as appears, the sap- 
ply is inexhaustible, and the human race entertains 
no more apprehension that the supply will be ex- 
hausted in reference to any future generation of suf- 
ferers than that the light of the sun, or the air, or 
the springs and streams, will be exhausted, or that 
the earth will become so sterile as to yield nothing 



320 THE ATONEMENT. 

more to support its teeming millions of living beings. 
'No cases of sickness, no forms of disease, exhaust 
the remedial provisions of nature. No case lies be- 
yond the I'ange of the provisions made ; no case oc- 
curs, however new, malignant, or epidemic, which 
does not appear to have been contemplated in the 
remedial arrangement, or which is so pervading, so 
novel, or so obstinate that it cannot be subjected to 
the laws of healing. 

(3.) I^ature, so to speak, invites all men to come 
to its provisions. The sun shines for all, and in- 
vites all to receive its light ; the music of the groves 
is for all, and invites every ear to open itself to its 
melody; the green carpet on the earth is spread for 
all, and invites all to look upon its beauty; the 
fountain flows for all, and invites all who are thirsty 
to stoop down and drink; the stars of night shine 
for all, and invite every mariner to guide his course 
over the deep by their teachings; the balmy air is 
for all, and invites all to inhale it. In nature there 
is no exclusiveness and no limit. Everywhere man 
is invited to enjoy the bountiful productions of the 
Creator's goodness, and one may feel that he is as 
welcome as another. 

We take these undoubted principles and come to 
the contemplation of the plan of redemption. As a 
part of the arrangements of the same God, we should 
ex2:)ect to find the same arrangement in that plan. 
"We should be disappointed — we should feel a shock 
in our anticipations — if we did not find the same 
principles there; if we found all in nature free, in- 
exhaustible, inviting, all in redemption limited, ex- 
hausted, and repelling. If there are such ample 



THE EXTENT OF THE ATONEMENT. 321 

provisions for man's temporal maladies and wants, 
we should expect to find provisions equally ample 
for his eternal necessities. In the arranscements 
of nature we think that we see unmistakable in- 
dications of what the Divine character is. We 
argue from that. Apart from any revelation, and 
back of any revelation, we form our conceptions of 
God ; and we cannot think otherwise of him than we 
do. On deep and indestructible foundations our 
faith is fixed that the provisions of nature are free 
and inexhaustible ; and with these feelings we come 
to the volume of revealed truth, and ask what are its 
teachings in regard to redemption. Shall we find a 
system equally free and liberal there, or a system 
narrow, limited, exhaustible ? We cannot indeed 
deny that these previous anticipations might be set 
aside; and we could not impugn the Divine sove- 
reignty if it were done. We must admit — we can- 
not doubt — that God has a right to bestow salvation, 
as he does health and property, on whom he pleases. 
We know that he may come into the midst even of 
these general provisions, and discriminate among 
men, giving health to one, and withholding it from 
another; saving one alive, and leaving another to 
die; making one rich, and consigning another to 
poverty; continuing to one the blessing of sight, and 
causing another to be blind. But the point of the 
argument now submitted is not this. It is, that, 
having made ample, full, and free provision for the 
maladies of men elsewhere, it is a natural anticipation 
with which man comes to the Bible that he will find 
the same thing in the plan of redemption. It is an 
obvious inference that the impressions which God 



322 THE ATONEMENT. 

has designed to make in regard to his character in 
his works will be found to be sustained and con- 
firmed in the provisions for salvation. We know 
that God might have made the world differently. 
We cannot doubt that he might, in his sovereignty, 
and for reasons unknown to us, have actually limited 
the provisions for human comfort to a part. We 
cannot doubt that he might have provided a remedial 
system only for a portion of those who should be 
prostrated by disease, or that a healing arrangement 
should have been made for only a part of the 
maladies to which the race would be subjected. We 
know^ that it might have been so arranged that new 
forms of disease would spring up, in the course of 
centuries, for which there had been no provisional 
anticipation; that not only the materia medica of 
nature would be exhausted in regard to existing 
maladies, but that for those new maladies no pro- 
vision would have been made, and that, despite all 
human skill and wisdom, those maladies must carry 
desolation over the world. But that is not the point 
of the remark which I am now making. It is, that 
since no such arrangement is in fact found in nature, 
but that all such contingencies have been provided 
for, we naturally and properly look for a similar 
thing in the plan of redemption. In the actual ar- 
rangements of nature, as far as they go, we know 
w^hat God is: we infer that the same arrangements 
will be carried out on the widest scale; and hence, 
by the analogy, we anticipate that the atonement, if 
one is made, will be arranged on the same principles 
of freedom, abundance, and invitation. 

B. The analogy in these and similar cases fur- 



THE EXTENT OF THE ATONEMENT. 323 

nislies an answer to the objections which are made 
to the atonement itself, and particularly to the doc- 
trine of a general atonement. The point of the 
remark now to be made is, that the same difficulties 
and objections lie against these arrangements in 
nature which are alleged to exist in regard to the 
atonement. 

(1.) One of the objections to the doctrine of an 
atonement, which is often urged, is, that if God had 
intended that there should be an atonement made 
for sin, it would have been made at once on the fall 
of man, or, at least, that there would have been so 
clear an announcement of the intention, and so full 
a statement of its nature, that man could have 
availed himself of it at once. It is incredible, it is 
said, that an arrangement so indispensable for the 
salvation of man should have been delayed for so 
many ages, and that so many generations should 
have been suffered to go down to death before it 
was made, with no possibility of being benefited 
by it. Why, it is asked, should God suffer four 
thousand years to pass away before the great trans- 
action should occur by which man was to be re- 
deemed ? "Why should the generations of men, in 
that long period of time, be left in a condition so 
unlike that in which they would have been if the 
atonement had been made ? 

How, to this objection the reply from the analogy 
of nature is obvious. It is that precisely the same 
thing has occurred in regard to the arrangements 
for healing the maladies of the body. "With the 
same reason it might be asked why the remedies in 
the healing art were not at once made known to a 



324 THE ATONEMENT. 

suffering race, and why so many generations were 
suiFered to pass away before those remedies were 
found out and were made available to mankind. 
For any thing that appears, all the arrangements 
which exist now might have been as well made 
known in the first age of the world as to have been 
successively discovered by the slow researches of 
advancing generations. Vaccination for the small- 
pox would have been as effectual at first as it was 
when its eflicacy was discovered by Jenner; and it 
may be asked, Why were numberless hosts of the 
human race suffered to die under one of the most 
fearful forms of disease before a check was put to its 
ravages by this discovery? The tree producing the 
Peruvian bark, for any thing that appears, has grown 
in the lands which now produce it from the beginning 
of the creation. Why were not its virtues at once 
made known ? Why were multitudes of human 
beings suffered to languish and die under various 
forms of burning fever, when that which might have 
done so much to stay those evils, and to relieve 
human misery, and to save the lives of men, grew 
and decayed unknown, being of no practical benefit 
to mankind, and apparently created for naught? 

It should be remembered, also, that the objection 
would be of the same force in regard to every thing 
which would promote human comfort and relieve 
human misery ; every thing which has been stricken 
out by the discoveries of advancing ages and genera- 
tions ; every thing by which the condition of an 
advanced period of the world is made more com- 
fortable than a preceding period ; every thing in re- 
gard to health and happiness, to the arts and 



THE EXTENT OF THE ATONEMENT. 325 

sciences, to architecture and to agriculture, to na- 
vigation and travelling ; every thing in which any 
one generation excels that which went before. 

The objection would, in fact, go to this point, that 
all that could ever promote human happiness should 
have been made known at the beginning, and that 
nothing should be left to the slow development of 
ages ; that is, that the world should have been made 
as complete at first as it ever will be, or that in the 
universe at large there should be no development 
or progress. But an objection that is so wide and 
sweeping as this is, assuredly, can have no solid 
foundation. 

(2.) A similar objection to the doctrine of general 
atonement which may be met by the analogy of 
nature is, that it is to be presumed that if an atone- 
ment was to be made the knowledge of it would be 
imparted to all mankind. As all must have an in- 
terest in it, — as it must be equally necessary for all, — 
as all must be in danger of ruin to whom that know- 
ledge is not imparted, — it would seem to be evident 
that a benevolent and just Being, who had caused 
the atonement to be made, would also cause the 
knowledge of it to be communicated at once to all 
mankind. 

But to this objection a similar reply may be made. 
It is a matter of fact that the most valuable truths 
known to man, and those which are quite necessary 
to his welfare, are not made known to the mass of 
mankind. The time may come when they will be, — 
just as the time may come when the knowledge of 
the atonement will be communicated to all men ; but 
as a matter of fact they are not thus made known to 

28 



326 THE ATONEMENT. 

all mankind. The truths which constitute science, 
properly so called, are known to but few of the race. 
The truths connected with the healing art are known 
to few. The knowledge of the most valuable dis- 
coveries and inventions is as yet confined to a small 
portion of the race. The knowledge of the best 
modes of agriculture, of the best style of architecture, 
of the mechanic arts, is, and always has been, con- 
fined to a comparatively small portion of the race. 
Indeed, there is no one thing that seems essential to 
human comfort, or desirable for the best interests 
of mankind, that is, as yet, not confined to a few of 
the human family. With an adajptedness indeed to 
the entire race, the knowledge of these things is in 
fact limited ; and it is obvious, so far as the principle 
is concerned, that the same objection might be urged 
against this arrangement which is urged against the 
manner in which the knowledge of the atonement 
has been communicated to mankind. 

But further: the objection, if a valid one, would 
not be removed until the entire race should be, in 
respect to all kinds of knowledge, and to all things that 
pertain to well-being and comfort, placed precisely 
on the same level. Indeed, the objection must go 
further than even this. It must go to the point that 
all the human race should be precisely alike ; that 
no one should have any thing in health, complexion, 
beauty, strength, stature, property, raiment, friends, 
intelligence, length of life, which every other one 
has not also. But it is obvious that an objection 
which would lie thus against the whole structure of 
the world must be without any solid foundation. 
And it is equally obvious that if the knowledge of 



THE EXTENT OF THE ATONEMENT. 327 

the atonement is made to mankind on the same 
principle as knowledge on other subjects, it has this 
presumption in its favour, — that it is from the same 
source; that is, that it is from God. 

(3.) A third objection to the doctrine of the atone- 
ment may be met in the like manner by the analogy 
of nature, while at the same time that analogy may 
furnish an argument in defence of the doctrine itself. 
It is an objection to the doctrine of a general atone- 
vieiit. The objection would be, that, on the supposi- 
tion that Christ died for many who will not be saved, 
the atonement is so far a icaste; that is, that he who 
made the atonement, to just the extent to which it 
would not be applied, endured sufferings which 
would avail nothing, and which benevolence re- 
quired should not have been inflicted on him. To 
what purpose, it would be asked, were those un- 
compensated sorrows? Why should the Redeemer 
be subjected to sufferings which would be of no 
avail? How could a benevolent God give up an 
innocent being to sorrows which it was known 
would never be made available to the salvation of 
men, and which it was never intended should be 
thus available ? 

It is not needful now to inquire how far this 
objection is founded on a comm.erdal view of the 
atonement, or on the idea that it was necessary that 
precisely the same amount of suffering, and the same 
kind of suffering, should be endured by him who 
made the atonement which would have been endured 
by those for whom he died; but the objection, even 
if that were the correct view of the atonement, may 



328 THE ATONEMENT. 

be met by considerations drawn from the analogies 
of nature. 

(«.) There is, in fact, much suffering in the world, 
and especially much that is endured in behalf of 
others, which seems to be mere waste, or which ac- 
complishes none of the ends for which it was en- 
dured. Not a little, for example, of the toil of a 
mother, and the anxiety of a father, in training up 
their children, seems to be mere waste. The child 
nurtured with so much care is cut down by death 
just as he approaches the period of usefulness, and all 
the hopes cherished in his case are blighted forever; 
or he becomes early a victim of dissipation, and by 
his vices and follies breaks the heart of a mother 
and brings down the gray hairs of a father with 
sorrow to the grave. Much of the hard service ex- 
pended in defence of a country's rights seems to be 
a waste. The liberty that is sought is never gained ; 
and, after prolonged and dreadful sufferings, the 
chains of tyranny are again riveted upon helpless 
millions, and for ages the nation groans in hopeless 
bondage. Thousands bleed on the field of battle ; 
thousands of wives are made widows ; thousands of 
children are made orphans ; fire and famine spread 
over the land ; but nothing apparently is accom- 
plished as a compensation for so severe and pro- 
tracted suff'erings. In like manner, not a few of the 
sacrifices made in the cause of benevolence seem to 
be mere waste. Hundreds of valuable lives are lost 
before there are any indications of success ; schemes 
of benevolence, formed apparently under the direc- 
tion of God, and prosecuted under much suffering 
and self-denial, are ultimately abandoned, and all 



THE EXTENT OF THE ATONEMENT. 329 

that remains to mark the efiect and to perpetuate its 
memory may he the gravestones of those who have 
fallen in the field of toil and disappointment. If we 
should make an exact estimate of the suffering thus 
endured that seems to be mere waste, we should he 
surprised at the amount which the investigation 
would disclose; and, from the analogy, we should 
not he surprised to find that the same principle 
existed in the work of redemption. 

(h.) But it may he true, after all, that this is in 
appearance only; for we may not have seen all the 
ends to be accomplished by suffering. Though it 
seems to be wasted, it may have bearings as yet im- 
perfectly known to us, which, if known, would 
satisfy us of the wisdom and benevolence of the ar- 
rangement. We assume more than we have a right 
to assume, — that we know all that is to be known of 
any of the arrangements of God. "We cannot take 
it for granted that his plans may not have ends and 
uses as yet unknown to us. "We assume more than 
we have a right to assume when we say that the 
toils of a parent in behalf of a child that is early cut 
down by death, or that the sacrifices of patriots who are 
unsuccessful in the establishment of freedom, or that 
the sufferings of those who have laboured to spread 
salvation abroad and who die seeing no fruit of their 
labours are in vain. To be able to settle this point, we 
must take in the whole of the Divine plan, and see all 
the effects which may, by any possibility, grow out of 
such acts of toil, self-denial, and suffering. In each 
and every case the mere manifestation of benevolent 
feelings — the development and the display of cha- 
racter — may he 2^ great object, perhaps an object in 

28«- 



330 THE ATONEMENT. 

itself sufficient to justify all tlie sacrifice that is 
made. It must be remembered that the display of 
character seems to be the main design of a large por- 
tion of the arrangements of the universe. Indeed, 
it is commonly held, and the position cannot be de- 
monstrated to be an erroneous one, that the great 
and leading design of the universe is to display the 
Divine perfections. If this be so, then any thing that 
would exhibit benevolence, wisdom, power, or skill, 
would fall in with that general design, though it 
should seem to accomplish no other end. 

[c.) But it should be remembered further that 
though the atonement may appear to be made in 
vain ; though there may seem to be a superabun- 
dance of merit which will never be of avail in the 
salvation of men ; though many for whom Christ 
died may perish, yet that even such a fact would fall 
in with what is undoubtedly the analogy of nature. 
How much is there in nature that seems to be in 
vain ! How often does the rain descend on barren 
rocks or on sterile fields, where are neither man nor 
beast, to our eyes apparently in vain. What floods 
of light are poured each day on barren wastes and 
untraversed oceans, to our eyes in vain ! How many 
flowers shed their fragrance and ' waste their sweet- 
ness on the desert air,' apparently for naught ! How 
many majestic trees rear their heads in the wilder- 
ness, and stand there for ages in undiscovered gran- 
deur, and then fall and decay, apparently in vain ! 
How often does fruit ripen and fall in regions where 
there is no man to gather it, apparently in vain ! 
"What vast prairies have been covered for ages with 
flowers, apparently in vain! What mines of coal. 



THE EXTENT OF THE ATONEMENT. 331 

and diamondSj and gold are buried deep in the 
earth, so far as we can see, in vain ! What mighty 
powers of intellect are created in each generation 
that remain undeveloped and uncultivated, or that 
are wasted in wild and visionary schemes, to our 
eyes apparently for naught! How many 'Hamp- 
dens' and 'Miltons' lie in ^village churchyards,' 
when far inferior intellectual endowments than 
they actually possessed would have been ample to 
accomplish all the purposes wdiich they did accom- 
plish in their lives ! And how often do healing 
fountains run for ages before they are discovered, 
flowing apparently in vain, while thousands suffer 
and die for whose maladies their wasted waters 
would have been an alleviation or a cure ! 'No one 
can stand near the fountains at Saratoga, for ex- 
artiple, and not have before him an illustration 
of the very point now under consideration in re- 
gard to the atonement. So far as appears, and so 
far as we have any evidence, those waters have been 
flowing on a barren region since disease and suffer- 
ing began. Day and night, summer and winter, 
those streams flowed forth in abundance, and appa- 
rently with no tendency to exhaustion, for thousands 
of years. Yet they flowed apparently in vain. No 
one knew of their existence or their healing powers ; 
and myriads suffered and died who might, if they 
had known of them, have been kept alive. And 
even now what a waste ! 'What vast quantities of 
those waters flow off and mingle with common 
streams, and make their way to the great waste, 
the ocean ! Why did God make these fountains in 
the. wilderness so long before they were needed? 



332 THE ATONEMENT. 

"Why did he not cause their healing qualities sooner 
to be made known to the suffering? Why did he 
at first — why does he now — create more than is abso- 
lutely necessary for the purposes of healing the sick? 
Why suffer these healing streams still to flow off on 
barren sands, lost as to any healing purpose, while 
so many suffer and die for the want of them? He 
that can answer these questions can answer most 
of the questions which are asked about the atone- 
ment, — perhaps can solve all the difficulties which 
press upon the mind on the supposition that an 
atonement has been made which will never be 
available to large portions of a suffering and dying 
race. How much like those running fountains is 
such a plan of redemption, — so full, so free, so 
adapted to the suffering and dying, and yet appa- 
rently so much of it in vain ! 

n. The presumptions from the nature of the 
atonement, and from the rank and dignity of him 
who made it, are, that it was designed to be general. 

The atonement, in respect to the points now 
under consideration, is such as it loould he on the 
supposition that it was intended to be applicable to 
all men. In other words, looking at the atonement 
as it is represented in the Scriptures, it is such that, 
unless there were positive evidence to the contrary, 
we should naturally infer that it was intended for 
all mankind, — as light, air, water, flowers, and heal- 
ing fountains appear to have been designed for all 
men. Or, to express the same thought in another 
form, — if it were revealed that the atonement was 
designed for all men, it is actually such in respect to 
its nature, and to the rank and dignity of him who 



THE EXTENT OF THE ATONEMENT. 333 

made it, as we should suppose it would be if that 
were the idea. 

This general thought may be presented under two 
subordinate heads: — the nature of the atonement; 
and the rank and dignity of him who made it. 

(1.) The nature of the atonement. 

I refer to it now as an exhibition of suffering in be- 
half of others ; and the idea is that, as a general prin- 
ciple, all suffering in behalf of others is of such a 
nature as to have a general applicability, or such 
that any number of persons may avail themselves 
of the benefit. It is true that the purpose of suffer- 
ing may he intended only for a few. It may be 
limited by express statement to a particular class of 
persons. A friend may submit to voluntary sacrifice 
for a friend, intending that the benefit shall be con- 
fined solely to him. A father may submit to toil 
and sacrifice for his children, expecting, and per- 
haps designing, that the benefit of his toil and suf- 
fering shall be extended only to them. A sufferer 
might state that his toil and sacrifice were only for 
a particular object, or to benefit only a particular 
circle of friends, and no one could doubt his right to 
do it. If such a limitation were found in the Scrip- 
tures in regard to the atonement, no one could 
question the fact in regard to the limitation of the 
design, as no one could question the right of the Re- 
deemer to die for any portion of the human race 
that he might select. But if there is no such limi- 
tation, then it is right to argue from the nature of the 
transaction, and to see whether we can find any 
thing in it to determine the question whether it is 
general or is limited. 



334 THE ATONEMENT. 

It is to be admitted that the atonement must be 
limited, and that we should expect to find an ex- 
plicit statement of that fact in the I^ew Testament, 
if the following ideas expressed the true nature of 
the atonement. 

(a.) If it were a literal payment of a debt; for a 
payment of a debt could not be general; that is, the 
payment of a specific sum of money due to another 
would not be a transaction of such a nature that a 
third person could avail himself of that payment as 
a reason why he should be discharged from the obli- 
gation of paying a claim on him ; and still less could 
it be the ground of a general statement that all 
debtors might be discharged from the obligation to 
pay their debts. The amount paid can be of avail 
only in the case where the payment was due. If, 
therefore, the atonement was a commercial transac- 
tion, — the exact payment of a debt due to justice by 
the sinner, — it could be applicable only to those for 
whom it was made ; and all who embrace this view 
of the work of the Redeemer must maintain the doc- 
trine of limited atonement, and all offers of salvation 
made by them to those for whom Christ did not die, 
must be based on falsehood and insincerity. 

(b.) If the proper idea of the atonement is that the 
same kind and ammmi of suffering were endured by 
him who made it which would have been by those 
for whom he died, then also the doctrine of limited 
atonement must be held, and we should expect to 
find that doctrine plainly laid down, or fairly im- 
plied, in the New Testament. For the idea in this 
view of the atonement is, that there has been no 
gain to the universe, but that there has been merely 



THE EXTENT OF THE ATONEMENT. 335 

a transfer of so much pain from the guilty to the in- 
nocent. Whether the substitute or the guilty person 
himself suffered, the entire amount of suffering, and 
the same kind of suffering, have been endured which 
would have been under any circumstances. Of 
course, according to that view, the atonement would 
not be of a general nature, and conld be made 
available only to those for whom this identical suf- 
fering was endured. The doctrine of a limited 
atonement, if this idea is correct, must be found in 
the New Testament, and all consistent preaching 
must be based on the supposition that no one can 
be saved except the elect for whom Christ died, and 
all offers of salvation made to others must be based 
on falsehood and insincerity. 

ic.) If the true idea of the atonement is that 
Christ endured the literal penalty of the law, then 
the doctrine of a limited atonement must be true. 
For, in that case, all that the law demands has been 
accomplished ; all that a penalty implies has been 
endured. But there is no such thing as a general 
penalty. The penalty of law pertains always to in- 
dividuals. The demands of the law are demands 
on individual men ; the penalty for violating law 
pertains to the individuals who do it. If they could 
themselves bear the penalty, they would have a right 
to a discharge ; and if another should bear it for 
them, they would have an equal right to it. If, 
therefore, the literal penalty be borne, the transac- 
tion must pertain to the individuals in reference to 
whom the claims of the law have been 'satisfied,' 
and can be extended to no other. If a murderer pays 
the penalty of the law on the gallows, that fact cannot 



336 THE ATONEMEXT. 

avail to the acquittal of auotlier murderer; still less 
can it be the ground of a proclamation that all mur- 
derers may now be acquitted. The murderer himself, 
if he should return to earth, could not be again in- 
dicted, convicted, and executed for the offence; for he 
has met all that the law prescribed as a penalt}^, and, 
so far as the laws of human legislation go, he is free. 
If a man who is sentenced to a penitentiary for a 
certain number of years 'serves out' that time, he 
has a right to a discharge. He has endured all that 
the law has prescribed in the case as a penalty. He 
cannot be tried and convicted again for the same 
offence. But the fact that he has borne the penalty 
of the law cannot be made available to the benefit 
of any other offender ; still less could it be made the 
ground of a general jail-delivery, or of a proclama- 
tion that the doors of all the penitentiaries in the 
land might be thrown open and all convicts be dis- 
charged. In like manner, if Christ bore the literal 
penalty of the law, it could avail only for those for 
whom he endured it. ISTo offer of pardon could be 
made beyond that; or rather, since the penalty of 
the law has been borne, and the law has been '•satis- 
fied,^ there can be no pardon in the case, any more 
than there is ' pardon' when a burglar has borne all 
that the law prescribed as a penalty, and now claims, 
as an act of justice, a discharge. If this were the 
true nature of the atonement, then it would follow 
that the doctrine of a limited atonement must be 
found in the Bible; and then also, as in the other 
cases, all offers of salvation made to those for whom 
Christ did not bear the penalty of the law must be 
based on falsehood and insincerity. 



THE EXTENT OF THE ATONEMENT. 337 

I have endeavoured (ch. vii.) to show that these 
are not just views of the atonement; and if they are 
not, then the way is open for the inference which I 
am endeavouring to show" necessarily follows from 
its nature. If, as I endeavoured to show, the atone- 
ment is [a) something substiiuied in the place of the 
penalty of the law, which wdll answer the same ends 
as the punishment of the offender himself would 
have done ; (b) that it secures reconciliation be- 
tween God and man ; and (c) that it is a manifesta- 
tion of the character of God to the inhabitants of 
other worlds, in showing to them how justice and 
mercy may be blended in the pardon of offenders, 
then it would seem clearly to follow that it may be 
general in its nature, and may be applicable to any 
number of individuals. So far as appears from this 
view of the atonement, the benefit might be extended 
to any number of offenders. It has no peculiar 
adaptedness to one more than to another. It is in 
this respect like the light of the sun, or like running 
fountains or streams, — adapted to all ; like medicine, 
— applicable to no one class of the human race exclu- 
sively, but having an original applicability to disease 
wherever it may be found. 

Thus it is with the sufferings of martyrs. The 
benefits of those sufferings are unlimited. Any 
number of persons, through any number of genera- 
tions, may be benefited b}^ their sufferings in the 
cause of religion. Those benefits fiow over all 
lands, and will flow on to the end of time. So far 
as their applicability is concerned, they have no limi- 
tation ; and so far as we understand the Divine pur- 
pose in permitting the sufferings of martyrs, there ap- 

W 29 



338 THE ATONEMENT. 

pears to have been no intention of limiting the bene- 
fits of those sufferings to any one class of mankind. 
But even though there should have been an inientioji 
of that kind, yet the might of those sufferings was 
manifestly such that the benefit might be extended to 
any number of individuals, and that the world at 
large, and to the end of time, might be made more 
happy by what prophets and apostles have endured. 
Indeed, we may suppose a real, if not a formal, invi- 
tation to go forth from every rack on which a suf- 
ferer has been stretched in the cause of religion; 
from every stake where the flames have kindled 
around a believer in Christ; from every prison 
where the patience and power of religion have been 
manifested by one who loved the Saviour, to partake 
of the benefits of those sufferings. For those suf- 
ferings were endured to show the reality, the power, 
and the Divine origin of the religion of Christ; to 
secure its establishment and perpetuity on the earth ; 
to furnish examples of what it is fitted to produce ; 
and all who choose may avail themselves of the 
benefits which have resulted to mankind from what 
those sufferers have borne. 

The same is true in regard to the sufferings of 
patriots in behalf of their country. The benefits of 
their sufferings are limited to no class of men, to 
no time, and, in an important sense, to no land. 
This w^hole nation is reaping the benefit of the suf- 
ferings endured at Valley Forge, and the world 
at large may yet acknowledge a debt of gratitude 
to "Washington ; for his patriotic self-denials may 
yet be among the means of diffusing the blessings 
of liberty afar among the nations of the earth. 



THE EXTENT OP THE ATONEMENT. 339 

In such cases we should feel that a statement that 
the results of benevolent suffering were limited to 
any particular class, or that there were any who 
were shut out from the privilege of availing them- 
selves of the • benefits which flow from such suffer- 
ings, would be as much a departure from the ar- 
rangements of nature as a similar statement in re- 
gard to the light of the sun, to running fountains, 
or to the materia medica of the world. The idea of 
being originally applicable to one as well as to 
another; the idea that all may avail themselves freely 
of all the benefits which flow from them, seems to 
be enstamped on every thing. "Why should we not 
expect to find the same idea pervade the doctrine of 
the atonement ? 

(2.) A presumption in favour of the doctrine of 
general atonement may be derived from the rank 
and dignity of him who made it. His rank and 
dignity were such as we should infer that they 
would be on the supposition that the atonement 
was intended to be general, but are not easily recon- 
cilable with the supposition that it was limited. In 
other words, the doctrine that the atonement was 
general better j^/5 in with that rank and dignity than 
the doctrine of a limited atonement; for it seems 
necessarily to follow from the fact that one so exalted 
was selected to make it, unless there is an express 
statement that it was designed to be limited. 

If the sufferer had been a mere man, then it would 
seem necessarily to follow that the atonement must 
have been limited. It would be impossible to con- 
ceive how a mere man, however pure in character, 
elevated in rank, or lofty in virtue, could have such 



340 THE ATONEMENT. 

merit that his sufferings could avail to the redemp- 
tion of the entire human race, or could constitute a 
basis on which an offer of pardon could be made in- 
definitely to the dwellers in an apostate world. 

If the sufferer were an angel, the same inference 
would follow. Limited as an angel must be in his 
capacity for suffering, occupying a rank far indeed 
above that of any man, but farther heloio that of a Di- 
vine being, it would be difficult to see how, on the 
supposition that an atonement could be made by 
him, his sufferings could have such merit that they 
could constitute a basis for an unlimited offer of 
pardon to all the dwellers in a fallen world. That 
is, it would be impossible to see how his suffer- 
ings could so express the Divine sense of justice; 
how they could so supply the place of the punish- 
ment of all these fallen beings themselves ; how they 
could so become a security for the good order of the 
universe ; how they could be made so effectual in 
bringing fallen millions to repentance and to holy 
living; how, in one w^ord, they could meet and 
remove the difficulties which, as w^e have seen, every- 
w^here attend the subject of pardon, that it would be 
proper for God, on the ground of these sufferings, to 
offer unlimitefi pardon to all the dwellers in a fallen 
w^orld. It may be mere feeling, but the feeling is a 
very strong and a very natural one, that an angel 
could not be the redeemer of a world. 

But we have no such feeling on the supposition 
that the Redeemer was Divine. There is no incon- 
gruity in the idea that he was Divine, and that the 
atonement was for all mankind. The one doctrine 
is adapted to the other; and if the one is true, the 



THE EXTENT OF THE ATONEMENT. 341 

other seems naturally to follow from it. We cannot 
but be impressed with the idea that one design in 
the selection of such a being must have been to 
guard against the supposition of any limitation in 
the case. And although we would admit the idea, 
on an express Divine statement, that there ivas a 
limitation, yet, looking at the rank and dignity of 
the sufferer, we could not but ask the question whi/ 
it was limited to a portion of the human family. 

To see the force of this remark, we may place 
ourselves in three imaginary positions, and en- 
deavour to interpret the nature of the atonement 
from each point of observation. 

(a.) We may look at the rank and dignity of the Re- 
deemer as such. Supposing that he was in a true and 
proper sense ' God manifest in the flesh ;' that in him 
* dwelt all the fulness of the Godhead bodily ;' that he 
was a strict and proper incarnation of the Deity ; the 
question would be, what would be the proper inter- 
pretation of his work in regard to its extent from 
the contemplation of that fact. It would seem that 
there would be but one answer to such a question. 
The idea of its being designed for all the human 
race would be at once suggested by that fact; the 
idea of its being limited to a few would appear to be 
wholly incongruous with it, — more incongruous than 
the idea of limitation attached to a running foun- 
tain, to the air which we breathe, or to the light of 
the sun. It might, indeed, be limited by the express 
purpose of a sovereign God, for man has no claim to 
a pardon, even after an atonement is made, and 
God must in all things retain his right to bestow his 
favours as he pleases ; but even in such a case the 

29* 



342 THE ATONEMENT. 

idea could not be avoided that the limitation must 
be in the mere purpose of God, and not in the 
nature of the transaction. 

(6.) We may look at the manifested character of 
the Eedeemer. So far as this would be a guide in 
regard to the extent of the atonement, it would seem 
to be clear that it must be unlimited, or that he 
would be willing that its blessings should be im- 
parted to all who needed pardon. In other words, 
if we take our views of the atonement from his 
character, and allow those views to interpret the 
atonement, we could not fail to come to the conclu- 
sion that it was designed to be unlimited. For in 
the benevolence of his character there was no limit 
or stint. There was no class of men for whom 
he showed any exclusive or especial favouritism. 
There was no class of sufi'erers who were ex- 
cluded from his bounty, and no j^oriion of any class. 
There was no act of his life which would imply that 
there was any limitation of design in imparting relief 
to the sufiering and the sad; no indication of ex- 
haustion in his capability of relieving those who were 
in distress and want. In respect to the blind, the 
only condition for receiving his aid was the fact that 
they were blind. There were no blind persons who 
might not freely come to him ; there were no cases 
in which it could be supposed that there was any 
limitation of his willingness to heal them, or in 
which there was any indication that his power of re- 
storing sight had been exhausted. In respect to the 
deaf, there were no cases so obstinate that he could 
not cause the deaf to hear; in respect to the lame, 
there were none so lame that they could not be 



THE EXTENT OF THE ATONEMENT. 343 

made to *leap like an hart;' in respect to disease in 
any form, there were no cases so obstinate that he 
could not remove the disease in a moment ; in re- 
spect to the sufiering and the sad, there were none 
whose hearts were so deeply stricken, so crushed, so 
broken, that he could not give them 'the oil of joy 
for mourning, and the garment of praise for the 
spirit of heaviness;' and the numbers of the sad that 
thronged his path were never so great that he could 
not grant them relief. So of those whose hearts 
were crushed by the remembrance of sin. None 
ever came to him whose sins were so great that 
he could not forgive them; none so unworthy, so 
debased, so degraded, that he was not willing to 
receive them. If we go to the records of his life, 
and look at his acts of benevolence when on earth, 
and ask what would be likely to be the character of 
an atonement made by him, we should be at no loss 
for an answer. We should anticipate most confi- 
dently that it would be a general atonement. If 
assured that it teas general, we should feel at once 
that this fact was in perfect harmony with his whole 
character. If told that it was not general, we should 
be conscious of a shock on our anticipations, and 
should ask at once how such a fact could be recon- 
ciled with the other actions of his life. 

(c.) The same result would be reached if we took 
our point of observation from his sufferings. The 
idea here is, that the atonement, in respect to suffer- 
ing, was such as we must believe it would be on the 
supposition that it was intended that it should have 
reference to the whole of the human race. In other 
words, if it is assumed that the atonement was 



344 THE ATONEMENT. 

general, the sorrows which the Redeemer endured 
in making it were just such as they would be on that 
supposition. The whole transaction would be har- 
monious in respect to the design and to the manner 
of accomplishing it; for in contemplating the Re- 
deemer on the cross we cannot but feel, in the 
language of Dr. Chalmers, that he "bore the burden 
of the world's atonement;" in the language of Isaiah, 
that " The Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us 
a^Z," (Isa. liii. 6;) in the language of Paul, that he 
" tasted death for every man," (Heb. ii. 9;) in his own 
language, that '* God so loved the world that he gave 
his only-begotten Son, that wJiosoever believeth in 
him should not perish, but have everlasting life." 
John iii. 16. 

III. The remaining point is, the testimony of the 
Bible in reo:ard to the extent of the atonement. 

(1.) It is declared in the Scriptures that he died 
for all mankind. Such passages as the following 
would seem to place the matter beyond all doubt; 
for the doctrine is expressed in them as clearly as it 
is in the creeds of any who profess to hold the doc- 
trine, and so clearly that if this language does not 
convey the doctrine it would be impossible to express 
it in any forms of speech. " God so loved the world 
that he gave his only-begotten Son, that whosoever be- 
lieveth in him should not perish, but have everlasting 
life." " God sent his Son that the world through him 
might be saved." (John iii. 16, 17.) Such declara- 
tions are as general as they could be made. It is 
not the 'Jewish world' which is specified; nor the 
* elect world;' not the 'world' of wealth, refinement, 
rank, honour; not the 'world' of poverty, servitude, 



THE EXTENT OF THE ATONEMENT. 345 

and wretchedness: it is the 'world' as such, embrac- 
ing all ranks, all classes, all complexions, all condi- 
tions. If Christ died only for a part of the human 
family, though that fact were known only to Him 
who gave him to die, then the declaration should 
have been such as to embrace that fact, and not such 
that its obvious interpretation would be contradic- 
tory to it and irreconcilable with it. Then the 
doctrine should have been expressed in some such lan- 
guage as this: — ' God so loved the elect world that he 
gave his only-begotten Son, ihsXichosoever believeth in 
him should not perish.' But this is not the language 
of the Saviour in explaining the purpose for which 
he came into the w^orld. It may be added further, 
in explanation of these passages, that they occur m 
a formal statement of the Redeemer as to the design 
of the plan of redemption. Nicodemns came to 
him for information. The Saviour intended mani- 
festly not only that he should personal!}^ receive a 
just account of the nature of that work on which he 
had entered, but that, being one of the Great Coun- 
cil of the nation, he should be able to convey to that 
body a fair statement of the peculiarit}^ of his doc- 
trines. He gave to him, therefore, this statement 
of what he purposed to accomplish. He showed 
him that his religion was designed to overstep the 
narrow boundaries of Judea, and that he purposed 
that its benefits should extend to the whole world. 
It was to a Jewish mind a new idea that a system 
of religion coidd embrace the world, or that any could 
become the friends of God without first becoming 
Jews. These statements contain the first intimation 
with which we meet in the ministry of the Saviour 



346 THE ATONEMENT. 

of that glorious feature of his gospel which after- 
wards became so prominent in his own preaching 
and in that of his apostles, — that the benefits of his 
religion were intended to be limited by no age or 
country; that the plan of redemption was adapted 
to human nature as such ; that it was regardless of 
colour, caste, or rank ; that it demanded, as the con- 
dition of receiving its benefits, only the consciousness 
of guilt and a willingness to accept of it. If these 
passages stood alone, they would demonstrate, by 
every fair application of the rules of interpretation 
to language, that the death of Christ was designed 
for the human race as such; that the atonement was 
for all mankind. But they do not stand alone. 
Such statements as the following show that this is 
the natural and regular mode of speaking on the 
subject in the 'Sew Testament: — "We see Jesus 
. . . crowned with glory and honour, that he by the 
grace of God should taste death for every man." 
(Heb. ii. 9.) "If any man sin, we have an advocate 
w^ith the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous, and he 
is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, 
but also for the sins of the whole world." (1 John 
ii. 1, 2.) So language could express the universality 
of the design of the atonement more clearly or 
strongly. So rules of fair exegesis can make this 
language consistent with the idea that he died for a 
part only of the race of man. J^o one can explain 
the fact that, if the atonement was only for a part, 
the sacred writers should have used language so un- 
guarded ; so certain to convey erroneous views of the 
subject on which they wrote, and to deceive man- 
kind on the most vital of all the doctrines of revealed 



THE EXTENT OF THE ATONEMENT. 347 

religion : language which, if the atonement is limited, 
has actually led, and will forever lead, a large part 
of the world into error. 

(2.) On the ground of the atonement made by the 
Eedeemer, salvation is ofiered to all mankind. The 
fact that in the !N"ew Testament salvation is offered 
to all mankind cannot be disputed. The only ques- 
tion that can be raised on the point is, whether it is 
offered on the ground of the atonement, or in con- 
nection with the death of the Redeemer. If it is, 
then that will settle the fact that the atonement 
must have had such a reference to all mankind as to 
constitute a basis for such an offer, or such a re- 
ference to all men that if they should believe they 
would obtain eternal life. In regard to this point, 
it will be admitted, by all who hold to the necessity 
and the truth of the Christian revelation, that no 
offers of salvation have been made to man except in 
connection with the atonement made by the Re- 
deemer. If salvation could be offered on any other 
ground to one, it would be to all ; and if it could be 
thus offered, then the work of Christ was unneces- 
sary. God would not have two plans of salvation. 
He would not offer eternal life to one class without 
any reference to an atonement, and make the offer 
to another class in such a form as to involve the Re- 
deemer in the sufferings of the Garden of Geth- 
semane and Calvary. 

It should be borne in mind that when an offer of 
salvation is made to man it is God, and not man, 
who makes the offer. Whoever is employed to 
make the offer, it is as really his as though it were 
made by a distinct and audible voice from heaven. 



348 THE ATONEMENT. 

Man has no offer of salvation of his own to make to 
his fellow-men ; he can make none except as he is 
authorized to do it from on high. 

Supposing, then, that the numerous and free in- 
vitations found in the Scriptures addressed to all 
mankind are actually the language of God, it re- 
mains only to ask whether God would make such a 
proclamation to those for wliom no atonement had 
been made. Can it be believed that he would offer 
heaven to those for whom no heaven has been pre- 
pared ? Can it be believed that he is tantalizing his 
creatures with offers which are insincere, hollow, 
and unmeaning? Can it be believed that he assures 
men that if they will accept of Christ they shall be 
saved, when he knows that Christ did not perform 
any part of his work with reference to them, and 
that salvation through his merits would be impos- 
sible ? l!^ot thus does the Eternal Father deal with 
men ; and of nothing can we be more certain than 
that when he makes an offer of pardon he is sincere; 
when, on the ground of the gospel of Christ, he 
assures men that he is ready to save them, nothing 
can be more certain than that the Redeemer died for 
them. 

It will not meet the case to say that the atone- 
ment is 'sufficient' in its own nature for all men if 
God had chosen that it should have been made with 
reference to all. So far as he may choose to apply 
it to any portion of the human family, when made, 
there can be no doubt that that right remains in 
him as a sovereign. And so, if he had chosen that 
the atonement should have been made for only a part 
of the race, there could have been no reason to call 



THE EXTENT OF THE ATONEMENT. 349 

in question his right as a sovereign to do it, as he 
has, in fact, made such a discrirniDation between 
fallen man and the apostate angels. But the point 
now does not relate to this question. It is this: — 
that the offer of salvation is made not on the ground 
of an original sufficiency in the atonement itself, but on 
the ground that it had such a reference to sinners as to 
justify an offer of pardon. So far as that offer is 
concerned, there is no difference between those who 
will be saved and those who will not be; between 
the elect and the non-elect. It is not offered to the 
one class on the ground that it was made for them, 
and to the other on the ground that it w^as sufficient 
for them though not intended for them. Of any 
such distinction there is no trace w^hatever in the 
Scriptures. 

If there had been such a distinction in the mind 
of God, every consideration of sincerity and truth- 
fulness required that all the facts should be made 
known ; or, at least, that the communication made 
to men should not be so made as to leave a false im- 
pression. A number of men are captives in a 
foreign land. There is a settled price demanded for 
their ransom. A messenger comes from a man who 
is known to be able to ransom them all. They are 
told that he who has undertaken to ransom them is 
able to redeem them all, or that his wealth is sufficient 
for this. 'All that may be very true,' would be the 
reply ; 'but that is not what we wdsh to know. What 
we wish to know is, whether it is his intention thus 
to appropriate his wealth; whether the offer now 
made is based merely on the fact that he is a man 

30 



850 THE ATONEMENT. 

of wealth, or on the fact that the ransom has been 
so paid, or will be so paid, that we may avail ourselves 
of it. Is this proclamation designed merely to 
excite our admiration at the ability of the man of 
wealth, and to mock our misery by the exhibition 
of wealth which cannot in any way be ours? or is it 
made in good faith ? Has his wealth been appro- 
]Driated in any way to our release ? May we avail 
ourselves of it ? Or is it intended to release only a 
part, while there shall be, by the language used in 
the proclamation, a wholly erroneous view conveyed 
of the real character of him who is a benefactor 
towards a part, but who wishes to secure to himself 
the reputation, on false grounds, of being a bene- 
factor in the largest sense V Who would tantalize 
miserable men in an Algerine prison with vain and 
hollow declamation about the vast wealth of some 
man in a distant land, or about the 'svfficiency' of 
that wealth to ransom any number of Algerine 
captives, when it was certain that there was no in- 
tention of applying that wealth to their release, 
or when it was known that the arrangement con- 
templated only the release of a part? And yet 
does the doctrine that the atonement was ^suffi- 
cient' for all, but was not intended for all, mean any 
thing more than this ? If we should find it difii- 
cult to vindicate the conduct of a man in causing 
such a proclamation to be made, can we easily 
vindicate the character of God if he does the same 
thing ? 

(3.) It is a proof that the atonement is general, 
that it is made in the Scriptures the basis in proving 



THE EXTENT OE THE ATONEMENT. 351 

other doctrines. Thus, it is said in 2 Cor. v. 14, 
"For the love of Christ constraineth ns ; because 
we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all 
dead." That is, on the supposition that one died 
for all, or assuming that to be an admitted fact, 
then, by fair inference, it follows that all were dead. 
Or, in other words, from the fact that Christ died 
for all men, the doctrine of universal depravity 
legitimately follows. On this passage it may be 
remarked : (a.) That the apostl'e assumes it as a well- 
known and admitted fact — a point about which there 
could be no difference of opinion, and which might 
be made the basis of any inference that might follow 
from it — that Christ died for all. He did not deem 
it necessary to go into an argument to prove it, or 
even to state it formally. The fact that Christ died 
for all, or that the atonement was general, was so 
well known, and so universally admitted, that he 
made it a first principle; an elementary position; a 
maxim. (6.) It is the obvious interpretation of the 
language used, that Christ did die for all men. It is 
the sense which would commend itself to any one 
on reading the passage, unless he had a theory to 
make out to the contrary. It is impossible now to 
express the idea of a general atonement in words 
more unambiguous. They who maintain the doc- 
trine of a general atonement can find no more ap- 
propriate words with which to express their belief 
than these; and, as they use this very language in 
their creeds, it may with as much propriety be 
doubted Avhether they really believe the doctrine 
as whether the apostle believed it; for if these 



352 THE ATONEMENT. 

words do not convey it, it would be impossible to 
express so plain a thought in human speech. So 
in similar cases. If a man affirms that all men 
are mortal, the obvious interpretation of the lan- 
guage is that the statement applies to each indi- 
vidual of the race. If we are told that all the pas- 
sengers on board a steamboat were drowned, the 
obvious meaning is that the statement includes each 
individual on board. If told that in a case of ship- 
wreck a raft was constructed for all the passengers, 
it would be inferred that it was for each individual ; 
and it would be right for each individual, under such 
a general statement, to avail himself of this means 
of escape; nor could any one reconcile it with 
honesty or benevolence should he attempt to escape 
on the raft, if he was told that he was not in- 
cluded in the arrangement. If, in such a case, lan- 
guage like the following should be used, — 'We 
infer that if a raft was made for all, then all were in 
danger of perishing,' — the fair inference would be 
that the da.nger pertained to each individual in the 
ship ; and if it should appear at last that the raft was 
not made for all, then, so far as the argument was 
concerned, there would be no proof that all were in 
danger of perishing. If we should be told that all the 
inmates of a hospital are sick, the obvious interpreta- 
tion of the language w^ould be, that there was no 
one who was in health ; and if we were told that 
medicines were provided for all because all were sick, 
we should infer that the healing arrangement con- 
templated each one in the hospital, and that each 
one might avail himself of it. Just such as this is 



THE EXTENT OF THE ATONEMENT. 353 

the argument of the apostle, that it is proper to infer 
because Christ died for all that all were dead. The One 
fact, that Christ died for all, is commensurate with the 
other, that all were dead in sin. (c.) If this interpreta- 
tion is not correct, then the passage affords a case of 
false reasoning. The proof of universal depravity on 
which the apostle relies is, that Christ died for all : — 
"If one died for all, then were all dead." But let it 
be supposed that the apostle believed that Christ did 
not die for all; that he died only for a part, — for the 
elect portion of mankind, and that the atonement 
was limited in its nature and intention to them: 
then what must have been the real fact in the case 
as it lay in his mind, and what must have been the 
form of the argument if it had been put into words ? 
It would have been such as the following : — ' Christ 
died for the elect: therefore all men are dead in sin.' 
Such reasoning would be of the same nature as the 
following : — ' Medicine is provided for a part of an 
army, therefore all in the army are sick ; pardon is 
offered to a jpart of mankind, therefore all are guilty ; 
arrangements were made to save a part of the crew 
on board a ship, therefore all were in danger.' Paul 
never reasoned in this way. He undoubtedly be- 
lieved that Christ died for all mankind ; and on the 
ground of that he inferred that all men needed such 
an atonement, for that all were dead in sin. 

(4.) The next point in proof that Christ died for 
all men is, that it is expressly said that some for 
whom he died will perish, thus showing that he died 
for some who are not of the ^ elect' and who will 
not be ultimately benefited by his death. Thus in 

X 30* 



354 THE ATONEMENT. 

2 Peter ii. 1: — "But there were false prophets also 
among the people, even as there shall be false 
teachers among you, who privily shall bring in 
damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that 
bought them, and bring upon themselves swift de- 
struction." In the expression 'the Lord that bought 
them,' there is, by fair interpretation, undoubted 
reference to the Lord Jesus Christ. When the word 
'boughf occurs elsewhere in the 'New Testament 
with reference to redemption, the allusion is to him. 
Thus, in 1 Cor. vi. 20 : " For ye are bought with a 
price;" in 1 Cor. vii. 23: "Ye are bought with a 
price." So the corresponding word purchase: (Acts 
XX. 28:) "Feed the Church of God, which he hath 
purchased with his own blood." So also the word 
redeem: — 1 Peter i. 18, 19: "Forasmuch as ye know 
that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, 
as silver and gold, but with the precious blood of 
Christ." Rev. v. 9: "Thou wast slain, and hast 
redeemed us to God by thy blood." Li the pass- 
age now under consideration, it is affirmed of the 
'teachers' referred to, that, though they had been 
bought, they would deny the Lord who had made 
the purchase, and would bring rain upon them- 
selves. There could not be a more unequivocal 
declaration that some for whom Christ died would 
perish, and consequently that the atonement must 
have been made for some who would not be saved. 
The case is similar to the following. An American 
citizen is made a captive. The price that is de- 
manded for his ransom is paid by the consul, and he 
is told that he may go at liberty and return to his 



THE EXTENT OF THE ATONEMENT. S55 

native land. He refuses ; disowns all allegiance to 
his country ; scorns the interposition of the consul ; 
enlists in the armies of the foreign power ; makes 
war on his own country, and is ultimately slain in 
battle, and 'brings upon himself swift destruction.' 
So he who embraces error; he who denies his 
Saviour; he for whom Christ died. He rejects his 
claims and his offers ; throw^s in his influence with 
the enemies of the Saviour ; is found among those 
enemies, and perishes, bringing upon himself swift 
destruction, though Christ died for him, and though 
he might have been saved. 

(5.) Another argument may be derived from the 
fact that the atonement is found to be ample for all. 
For eighteen hundred years the offer of salvation 
has been made to mankind on the ground of the 
atonement. All classes and conditions of men; 
men of every complexion and in every condition of 
life, have applied to God for pardon on the ground 
that Christ died for them. Not one who has urged thai 
ground of appeal has been rejected. It is susceptible 
of all the proof that the case will admit of, that not 
one sinner has ever been rejected on the ground 
that the atonement was not made for him, or that 
its efficacy had been exhausted. llTot one has gone 
to God with a broken heart and been ' sent empty 
away;' not one has come to the cross and been told 
that the blood that was shed there was shed for 
others, not for him. Thousands of the profane have 
been pardoned through the blood of Christ, and not 
one profane man has been told that his blood was 
not shed for him; thousands of the intemperate 



356 THE ATONEMENT. 

have been saved, and not one intemperate man has 
been repelled because the blood of the atonement 
was not shed for him ; thousands of the gay, the 
proud, the unbelieving, have been made sensible 
of their sins, and have supplicated pardon on the 
ground that Christ died for them, and not one has 
been rejected on the ground that Christ did not die 
for them; and should millions more of the same 
classes come, they would find the fountain that is 
*set open for sin and uncleanness' as full as ever, 
and would be as welcome as those were who went 
before them. For in the gospel there are no symp- 
toms of decay or exhaustion ; there are no in- 
dications that it is losing its power; there are no 
evidences that the streams of salvation will ever be 
dried up. Of the profane man it is just as certain 
now that he may be forgiven as it was of the first 
Bcofier that made an application for salvation ; and 
the fact that the first one who made the application 
was forgiven, constitutes the fullest demonstration that 
all who come with the same spirit will be accepted 
and saved. Of the proud or the unbelieving man it 
is just as certain that he may be pardoned as it was 
of the first proud man that was humbled before the 
cross, or the first infidel that came and sought mercy 
through the atonement ; and the fact that they were 
saved is a proof that all of the same character may 
be saved also. Of the worldly and the vain it is as 
certain that they may be saved as it was that the 
first worldly and vain sinner might be; and the fact 
that the first was saved is a proof that all of the 
same character now may be. Of the guilty female — 



THE EXTENT OF THE ATONEMENT. 357 

the wanderer from the paths of virtue — it is as cer- 
tain that she may be saved as it v^as of her' who 
washed the feet of the Saviour wdth her tears and 
wiped them with the hairs of her head ; and the fact 
that she was saved is a proof that all, to the end of 
time, and in every land, who come to the Eedeemer 
in the same way, will be saved. Of the infuriated 
persecutor now it is as certain that the merits of the 
atonement are ample for his salvation as it is that 
they were for the salvation of Saul of Tarsus ; and 
the fact that he was pardoned will be to the end of 
time a standing demonstration that all of the same 
character may be saved. (Compare 1 Tim. i. 16.) 
The merit of the Eedeemer is unexhausted by time. 
The stream of salvation never runs dry. As healing 
fountains flow from age to age, no matter what 
numbers apply for healing ; and as they retain their 
power, no matter what the forms of disease which 
are healed; and as they flow in large abundance 
above all that is needed and is applied, pouring their 
streams on the sands of the desert, or mingling with 
other waters, so it is with the waters of salvation. 
The fountain ever flows, by day and by night, in 
seed-time and harvest, in summer and winter. It is 
ample for all that apply. It is unexhausted by the 
numbers that come, and by the nature of the mala- 
dies that are healed. It flows in large abundance 
above and beyond all that is needed, and though 
it seems to be useless or wasted, it is neither; for, 
whether men avail themselves of it or not, it is a 
standing proof of the inexhaustible and illimitable 
benevblence of God. It will flow on to the end of 



358 THE ATONEMENT. 

time. When all the fountains that now pour forth 
healing waters for the cure of the sick shall — if they 
ever do — exhaust the source of supply, the streams 
of salvation will still pour forth their unexhausted 
floods over a lost world. ITever till time shall end 
will the sentiment of the beautiful stanzas with 
which this Treatise on the atonement may appro- 
priately close, cease to be true : — 

" There is a fountain, fill'd with blood, 
Drawn from Immanuers veins. 
And sinners plunged beneath that flood 
Lose all their guilty stains. 

" Dear dying Lamb, thy precious blood 
Shall never lose its power, 
Till all the ransom'd church of God 
Be saved, to sin no more.'' 



THE END. 



BTEBJKOTyPKD BV L. JOHNSON & CO., PHILADELPHIA. 



347 7 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: July 2005 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 'momson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724)779-2111 



